4 ms·

You mean 'just wants to listen to some music' _without paying for it_. Regarding the DMCA and fair use restrictions, I agree it's something we must fight again

You mean 'just wants to listen to some music' _without paying for it_. Regarding the DMCA and fair use restrictions, I agree it's something we must fight against, but I don't think piracy is an effective way to go about it.

anigbrowl 17y ago
Arguably not: http://arstechnica.com/media/news/2009/04/study-pirates-buy-tons-more-music-than-average-folks.ars http://arstechnica.com/media/news/2009/04/study-pirates-buy-... One reason that people listen to music for free online (which I usually do via YouTube) is because the selection of music on radio is dreadful - most commercial radio is owned by the same handful of companies, and it's the same greatest hits mixed in with the latest heavy rotation day-in day-out. I don't even own a radio any more - and as an ex-DJ, I am pretty sure I have spent far more on music than you will in your whole lifetime.
- gustavo_duarte 17y ago
  I wouldn't make personal assumptions like this. I might be a DJ myself. ;) Regarding the study, the results are in line with my expectations. Several of my friends are DJs and other art-loving people, who all download and buy massive amounts of stuff. The correlation between P2P downloads and buying strikes me as natural. There's no doubt the major labels have played a pretty rotten game and also got the Internet completely wrong. I want to see services that allow us to sample and listen to music without paying for it, allowing people to sample a large number of tracks and hopefully buy a fraction of those. I'd love to see decentralized distribution in such a way as to pay artists more and encourage creativity. But I don't think piracy is the answer.
quoderat 17y ago
No. I have both downloaded and bought far more music than most people on this site. I no longer own my massive collection of 3,000+ CDs -- they got stolen -- but have rebuilt it up to about 500. I've also probably downloaded 1TB+ of music over the years, so I could give it a good listen before I bought anything. Not to mention the hundreds of concerts I've attended over the years....

anigbrowl 17y ago

Arguably not: http://arstechnica.com/media/news/2009/04/study-pirates-buy-tons-more-music-than-average-folks.ars http://arstechnica.com/media/news/2009/04/study-pirates-buy-... One reason that people listen to music for free online (which I usually do via YouTube) is because the selection of music on radio is dreadful - most commercial radio is owned by the same handful of companies, and it's the same greatest hits mixed in with the latest heavy rotation day-in day-out. I don't even own a radio any more - and as an ex-DJ, I am pretty sure I have spent far more on music than you will in your whole lifetime.

gustavo_duarte 17y ago
I wouldn't make personal assumptions like this. I might be a DJ myself. ;) Regarding the study, the results are in line with my expectations. Several of my friends are DJs and other art-loving people, who all download and buy massive amounts of stuff. The correlation between P2P downloads and buying strikes me as natural. There's no doubt the major labels have played a pretty rotten game and also got the Internet completely wrong. I want to see services that allow us to sample and listen to music without paying for it, allowing people to sample a large number of tracks and hopefully buy a fraction of those. I'd love to see decentralized distribution in such a way as to pay artists more and encourage creativity. But I don't think piracy is the answer.

quoderat 17y ago

No. I have both downloaded and bought far more music than most people on this site. I no longer own my massive collection of 3,000+ CDs -- they got stolen -- but have rebuilt it up to about 500. I've also probably downloaded 1TB+ of music over the years, so I could give it a good listen before I bought anything. Not to mention the hundreds of concerts I've attended over the years....