|
Post by Thomas Eversole on Apr 1, 2015 20:15:47 GMT -6
What are your views on File Sharing? I'm sure this term makes some people irate - as its just flat out being a thief. I'm also sure that some people think some file sharing is ok, some is definitely NOT ok, some is not really ok, but its not thaaaaaat bad. Opinions? Also, no one will judge you here - based on what you share. (though there may be disagreements ) My opinion is that not all file sharing is equal. Sharing games or other programs/software is NOT ok in my book. For one, telling on myself here, back years ago when I was in college, I did search for, find and download some software/games in the hopes of getting it for free. After jumping through the hoops of getting a crack/keygen to work aaaaaaaaaaaaaand getting a virus, I managed to get a crashy version of something that didn't really work right anyway. For two, I've since repented from my actions in college and realized (most importantly) this sort of thing hurts developers, trying to make ends meet. The software/games I have now were all legally purchased and its nice to be able to use developer support. Sharing music, I view differently than "stealing software". Go to YouTube - there's uploads of full albums, everything from classical to contemporary, pop, rap, country, metal... EVERYTHING. Music channels and record labels will even host MOST of their albums as music or lyrical videos. That being said, I see no real (ethical) difference between streaming and downloading. ...especially when streaming anywhere anytime offers the same disclosure of having files that let anyone listen anywhere anytime. So, do I listen to/stream/download full length albums that someone else is "sharing"? Yes I do. I eventually buy what I like and... well, delete/stop streaming/stop listening to what I don't. Probably considered a jaded view, but I base this on my own music being shared. The first time I saw one of my albums as a free download, I was like, Hey!!!!! D: and thought about e-mailing them to take it down... ...and 10 seconds after that immediate reaction, I realized that 1) that means people are listening to my music and, well, I'm fine with having more fans - even if they're not "customers" and 2) these downloads, much like the shared software, were generally lower quality, tagged improperly, didn't include artwork, etc. Actually, I'm pretty certain some of my CD customers probably got their hands on a free download first. ...and I actually smile a bit when I see someone else sharing my album as a free download. Crazy, right?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 2, 2015 10:30:45 GMT -6
Like you Tom, in the late 90s/early 2000s I was downloading anything I could get my grubby little paws on from the new LOTR movie in theaters to Photoshop to cds.
In hindsight tho, and even before coming back to the Lord last August I had stopped all that except for the music. And don't think I mean I still dl music for free, that's not what I mean. But like you Tom I also use youtube to listen to and check out cds BEFORE i buy them. But I ALWAYS buy what I like. Now, of course if it's a cd out of print or whatnot I'm not going to spend $50 on it on ebay but will download it from youtube, it's not like the ebay seller is the band itself anyhow (not in any cases I've seen).
And I don't even think of streaming ie pandora/spotify file sharing, to me file sharing is torrents via demonoid etc. Maybe that's cause I used and experienced napster before Lars got all involved in making it legit, but in the end his actions were the best thing for the music industry. Up to that point, you had to rely on reviews or the radio and then HOPE the rest of the cd will be good. To this day, I won't buy any music from a group I've never heard.
Anyhow, that's how I view it.
|
|
|
Post by Kerrick on Apr 2, 2015 11:24:21 GMT -6
^Yup, I see streaming and downloading as a fair bit different, though now that we can access streaming music anywhere on our phones, that gap is closing.
I'm probably on the conservative extreme when it comes to this topic. To me, I see it all coming down to entitlement. I've noticed a lot of people feel they "deserve" to hear/own music. If an album is super rare or out of print, then it's ok to download it. I don't agree with that... If you can't get it legally, you shouldn't have it all - even if it is a "victimless crime." If a band wants their music to be free to access, it's very easy for them to do so. That's just my two cents. I couldn't back up why I think it's wrong to download otherwise unavailable music, though in a general sense, I do believe it comes down to entitlement.
|
|
|
Post by Thomas Eversole on Apr 2, 2015 18:18:15 GMT -6
I could absolutely see it as an issue of entitlement based on the motive. If someone says "I don't have this, I deserve it, I'm going to find it on a torrent and it will be mine"... well yeah. I totally agree with you there.
Its completely different though to be just going through life and one of your friends / forum mates / kind passerby happens to offer/share one of their albums, and it just so happens to be an out of print release you'd like to have.
Then its not entitlement at all, but "opportunity".
No different than hanging out with your friend, he's cleaning out his vehicle, you remark on the awesome CD he has in his cupholder, he offers to let you borrow it, and you accept.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 4, 2015 13:57:50 GMT -6
Many places like youtube, spotify etc actually do pay, albeit VERY SMALL AMOUNT, to the artist or label for streaming so I view that differently. HOWEVER the blog spots where you can download endless amounts of music for free well I do feel that is wrong.... Keep in mind for many years I downloaded HUNDREDS of albums from limewire and blog spots etc and one day someone told me that although it was legal to download files on sites like this the fact was that THE VAST MAJORITY of the albums were not approved of by the bands to be up there and that it was the equivalent of stealing. At that point I stopped. I have made it a point to legally by them and the files are no longer on my pc.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 5, 2015 19:44:44 GMT -6
If the artist gives permission to download the album, then yeah, totally cool. Otherwise it should be purchased.
|
|
|
Post by Kerrick on Apr 6, 2015 10:00:13 GMT -6
^Yup, that about sums up my feelings too.
|
|
|
Post by Thomas Eversole on May 15, 2015 21:26:58 GMT -6
Oh God, I think I've got a different view on this as of this weekend. "Volume" to me makes the biggest difference. I just started worldwide distribution and CD duplication through several companies a few days ago - been using them for 6 years between Hguols and Ankou Awaits... ...since literally several days ago, there aren't just a few sites sharing the new Ankou Awaits "Sobrwydd a Disgyblaeth" album. 3-10 sites giving it away, big whoop. ...but there's HUNDREDS of sites. Literally every entry on Google.com Page 3 just searching the album name in quotes is a torrent/file sharing blog and there's 10 pages, 925 entries. Makes me feel horrible. I sent an e-mail to all 3 companies I work with - because I've only given out music to 3 people, and they're trusted. It seems to be more than just a coincidence that I upload my music to their sites, and now there's hundreds of other sites available giving the album away for free...
|
|
|
Post by Varg on May 16, 2015 12:24:47 GMT -6
It is a shame. I have noticed this problem for years. Lars Ulrich made this very clear in the Napster case over a decade ago. The times show that he had 100% right. Why should music be so cheap? Why should anyone have the right to download and stream for free? or at least for a lesser amount of money? I truly long for the good old days when people had to go and buy music in the music store. The old days was better both for the music and for the people behind it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2015 13:17:57 GMT -6
The internet brought many many advantages, but the old days (searching through the record store and so more) were truly more exciting. And about downloads: getting music from any other source than what was intended by the musician is harming artists. Simple as that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2015 13:26:50 GMT -6
Here's an interesting situation:
We all know about the whole YouTube to MP3 thing. I personally think that it should not be used in most cases, especially if the music is for sale. However, as some of you may know, Vaakevandring had a demo that they recorded in 2000. The tracks made their way onto YouTube even though they were never released. Would using YouTube to MP3 to obtain those tracks be unethical? The band never put the music up for sale as far as I am aware.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2015 13:35:01 GMT -6
Not sure if I called it unethical, but at least one might say that one should ask the author when planning to do something or anything with his or her words, music, paintings... On the other hand: if the guys that were Vaakevandring don't care, it doesn't matter anyway.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2015 13:36:51 GMT -6
I didn't write that message in reply to you, NoSleep, but just for the general thread.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2015 13:47:24 GMT -6
Um...didn't read your question like that anyway, but that's what I think about the situation you described. To be more precise: uploading songs without asking the artist(s) probably isn't the ideal way.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2015 13:55:04 GMT -6
Oh. I thought you assumed that I was replying to you because you said "Not sure if I called it unethical", as if you thought that I thought you had called it unethical.
|
|
|
Post by Varg on May 16, 2015 14:00:45 GMT -6
NoSleep, yes you have right when it comes to all the many advantages internet and digital improvement provides. Easy promotions, Easier to connect with people and so on. Home studios has been a lot cheaper over the years. Recording software is easy to work with. You can get a good productions (LoFi or HiFi) without going to a professional studios etc. But at the same time I think there is too many bands that sounds the same these days. Music has stagnated in many ways. Or at least I think so.. Guess Im just old and bitter. haha!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 16, 2015 15:07:43 GMT -6
Haha...but yes, that's probably true. Perhaps that's the inevitable result of having countless bands in each sub genre - and that's of course connected to the possibility of having an at least decent production without spending tons of money (at least if you compare it to the times you had to go a studio or buy a multitracker and so on).
|
|
|
Post by Thomas Eversole on May 16, 2015 21:18:45 GMT -6
The internet brought many many advantages, but the old days (searching through the record store and so more) were truly more exciting. And about downloads: getting music from any other source than what was intended by the musician is harming artists. Simple as that. Ron White had a rant on his "Unprofessional" standup comedy stating just that. He also stated that stealing music back then was much more exciting as well as you had to figure out a way to shove a 12" Led Zepplin vinyl in your shirt and make your way out of the store with it. Seriously though, this is bothering me quite a bit. I know making metal isn't about money, but it costs money to make physical releases and it costs to make someone send digital files to paying companies. ...so in a way, I kind of count on SOME sales to reimburse me for what it took to produce/distribute the music. No one would want to pay 8 bucks to download it from iTunes when they can just hit one of the hundreds of X blogs with X download link from X filesharing site - for 100% FREE and 0% consequence. ...and if I'm just going to lose money publishing every release, why publish? I never had the thought of not recording any more music until this happened. I don't think I'd ever stop creating music, but I'm going to second guess publishing anything digitally, moving forward. Its just not secure and too easy to pirate. If someone's going to pirate a CD or cassette, they'd have to make convincing inserts/artwork and supply the materials, pay for shipping out of their own pocket, etc. __________________________________ Maybe this is actually a major perk of the Christian black metal scene over the secular scene. Being that Ankou Awaits is secular, any jackhole who likes metal could pirate it and probably will pirate it. A Christian band seems less likely to draw attention from those jerks, and agents in that scene would certainly have better morals than to steal music...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2015 5:36:56 GMT -6
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2015 7:08:37 GMT -6
Maybe this is actually a major perk of the Christian black metal scene over the secular scene. Being that Ankou Awaits is secular, any jackhole who likes metal could pirate it and probably will pirate it. A Christian band seems less likely to draw attention from those jerks, and agents in that scene would certainly have better morals than to steal music... You're probably correct on this. I'm sure some people would still pirate it if they could, but most people (hopefully) would not.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 17, 2015 7:43:28 GMT -6
Interesting thought. Not sure what to think about it though. To be honest I don't really believe that Christians are better persons (so to speak) just because they are Christians, so I'm not sure if there's a general difference when it comes to 'non official' downloads (but of course you're right about that aspect of attention). For example I remember reading Steve Rowe complaining about illegal downloads quite a lot.
|
|
|
Post by Thomas Eversole on May 18, 2015 17:25:44 GMT -6
I had a long talk with one of my friends at work - one of the very few people around that dig underground metal.
He said that 900 people hosting free downloads is a very good thing.
For one, junk music doesn't spread like wildfire, so they must like it. Two, you're getting your name out there - at least 900 people have heard of the music (since they setup the download) and if 10 people find each site... Three, downloaders wouldn't buy the music anyway, even if free links were available. Four, free advertising. Five, there are people out there who will "support" a band they link after they've jammed a free download.
I see his point - I see both sides actually. ...but hearing him say this helped.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on May 19, 2015 10:24:27 GMT -6
I totally agree on what your friend said about the fact that 'these' downloaders won't pay for the music anyway, even though I don't see the whole story as a good thing (btw I don't think it makes sense to be really worried about the whole issue at all - simply because it won't change a thing and therefore is a waste of energy). The funny thing is while many listeners seem to have a different attitude towards music nowadays (and are fine with streaming music whenever they want to hear a song or album), it's a whole different story with musicians. At least I haven't talked to anyone who said something like: "I'm so happy and proud! We've only sold two CDs, but got 200 more likes on Facebook!" - just like most musicians still seem to be very interested in physical releases.
|
|
|
Post by kimmo on Aug 1, 2015 6:25:11 GMT -6
I think downloading out of press -releases or posting them online is not harming anyone. At least thats how I see it, coming from hardcore/punk background. There are a bunch of blogs that do this kinda respecting the history, if you may. Usually I buy those old records from somewhere if I like them a lot. Sure, all of this is probably considered piracy as well. I just see it as sharing history. I have posted old zines on my blog. I have a disclamer that says that if you are the owner of the rights of this work and you want it removed, I will do it. My idea is certainly not to rip anyone off, but to share cool stuff that is hard to get. Some of them I have even aquired permission, if I have known the person who did the release. Downloading in print -releases is a different thing. That is in most cases wrong in my book. Its good that nowadays bands post their own work online and you can actually hear what you are thinking of buying. It used to suck in the old days when all I got was a description on a distrolist and then when I got the release it was horrible Bandcamp is also an excellent thing that I really love. As hardcore kids keep saying: SUPPORT THE SCENE!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2015 8:10:12 GMT -6
True. Have to say though that I miss this old situation a little bit from time to time (doesn't make much sense, I know )...ordering a title simply because your favourite magazin showed a good review or because of an interesting description on a distrolist. Was quite exciting, haha.
|
|
|
Post by nocturnaliridescence on Dec 19, 2015 21:05:49 GMT -6
I run youtube.com/user/itsnickjx And there are moral problems I face in running that channel. Because the entire point of that channel (as of 2014!) is specifically to serve as an "evangelistic" tool online. There are over 700 videos there, all from Christian bands. But I guess you also have to keep in mind that the music isn't just a message, it's also someone's copyrighted material. If an album is still pretty new, I'll just upload a song or two. That's what I did with Torches in the Void's debut (......... Er, hope you didn't mind, Kai! ..........) That way, the band is still getting promoted, and the message is still getting out there, but there's still the extra incentive for people to purchase the full album. If I can easily find a place where the album is still being (officially) sold, I'll put a link to that in the description. Whenever I do ask bands for permission, I'm always clear about putting links in the description and doing anything else they want done. Like with Orationem, I emailed the band (now revealed to be Thomas), and not only agreed to, but offered to just upload the samples, not the full tracks. And with a few other bands, I agreed to put links to their bandcamps in the video descriptions. Something that's really eating at me right now is the Opus Irae single. I got the digital version from Endtime's bandcamp last night, and I just can't stop listening to it. I love this song so much. Still wish they didn't use a heptagram in their logo, but anyway. The song itself is fantastic. This is a perfect opportunity to get the word out to the secular scene, because this single is easily something they'd go for. But I can't, because that would 100% definitely be illegal. Endtime have made it pretty clear they don't want the full song online. They only posted that 30-second sample. And as for bandcamp, they uploaded the single without including any audio. And it's not like there are 10 other songs on this thing. This is the only song, except for that instrumental intro that's exclusive to the physical version. It's giving away too much - according to human copyright. I would think I should respect our fellow brothers'/sisters' decision not to have the full song online, but it's still a rough situation, because we're compromising an opportunity to spread the life-giving word for what seems to be profit. It's like the articles I occasionally see when I have a "research" day - "all these questions and more will be answered in my book that's on sale now for only $23.95!" When I see those pages, it's like, if these answers are so important, why would any person require payment to see them? But overall when I upload music to ItsNickJx, I just... try to do what's best for both parties - God and the musicians. I have to make a few compromises, but at least it's getting people to check out some music with a good message. It's doing something for the kingdom, and that's all that matters. PS. Keep in mind, these views are coming from a musician. Not just a random file sharer. I hope this post doesn't come across as too... frustrated? It's just a confusing subject for me, and one I find myself thinking about a lot. Edit: Take careful note that in talking about Opus Irae, I only mentioned the activities of the label. I never assumed (either way) the opinions of the band members themselves. And I only said the label "seems" to be holding it back for profit. Edit 2: I feel like this post makes it seem like I don't care at all about permission from artists. I do, otherwise I wouldn't ask artists so often, I just don't always honestly think to (as with Torches in the Void). You also have to understand that a lot of music I upload is from people who have all but disappeared from the metal scene.
|
|
|
Post by Thomas Eversole on Dec 20, 2015 9:42:30 GMT -6
I think there's a world of difference between mass sharing files for free that bands/labels are trying to sell, and streaming music on a channel as a third party entity. Being a youtube channel owner is much like being a media reporter. Reporters cite sources and in a way, get a bit of credit for sharing something that someone else did. Which is perfectly fine... The intention is to report new/unheard music - not give away a product a band/label is trying to make a profit from. My opinion, piracy is unethical. "Reporting" is completely ethical. I've done all my digital distribution through CDBaby, and they have several different options. CDbaby exclusive - digital purchase only available through them Regional Distribution - if you're from the US, then distribution is only through US based companies. Worldwide Distribution - distribution to ALL digital companies "Do it all. Even unpaid." - Emphasis on not giving the music away, but people can listen to all the music before they buy it. Included in this option is all the album tracks being uploaded to YouTube, by CDBaby. Asking someone before you feature their art is noble. Even though I mentioned on my site I didn't want full Orationem songs on youtube, if I saw full songs there, yeah, I'd probably ask them to remove them... Not because I thought it was piracy, but because I don't want that reported by the media. If you want to feature that song, ask the band. I'm assuming they still have the rights to their music, not Endtime.
|
|