Is I-Tunes the answer?

[videoholic]

iTunes Sells 10 Millionth Song

In just over four months, Apple\'s iTunes music service has sold 10 million songs.

The company said that the service, which sells individual songs for 99 cents and allows more freedom for owners than most legal download sites, has averaged 500,000 a week since its introduction.

The milestone song was a copy of Avril Levigne\'s "Complicated," which was downloaded on Sept. 3

___________________________________________

Makes sense to me.  I would much rather pay 10 bucks for 10 songs I want than 14 bucks for 1.

Indeed, why pay lots of dough for an album where you actually just want 3-4 songs.

Hey when this service is available for Windows I\'ll register for it the next time I want to download a song.  I\'ll still use Kazaa though to test it and see if it\'s worth buying.  Some songs ain\'t worth $.99!

I already payed for Musicmatch\'s MX service which is basically digital radio.  I love it and it actually feels goods that the artists are getting reimbursed for their talent.

I have a question for all you:

If I go to the airport (or wherever) and the cop asks me to show him my bag and see 4 cds in which they\'re written 4 famous bands\' names... how the hell can I demonstrate that I paid for those songs and they\'re copied in those discs legally?

Everybody could say if cops ask that they\'re purchased through itunes.

[videoholic]

You shouldn\'t have to.  You are allowed to make copies of your own discs.  Heck, it\'s just as illegal to make a photocopy of a magazine page you don\'t own too.

Originally posted by videoholic
You shouldn\'t have to.  You are allowed to make copies of your own discs.  Heck, it\'s just as illegal to make a photocopy of a magazine page you don\'t own too.

Hey wait wait... I paid for that song and I CAN burn it on a cd if i must format my HDD, what\'s the problem? That\'s just like if you would buy a car but can\'t refuel.. only with the oil it brings..

[videoholic]

I think I am confused.  You can make a copy of the song if it\'s for your own personal use.

Here appears the legal/ethic problem I\'ve always exposed when speaking about the matters of mp3 music or sharing programs.

Just imagine that you are going to get married next week and then you go to the shop and buy a nice Valentino jacket that cost $1500 to you. You get married and keep your jacket in the closet. It happens that next year your brother is going to get married too and you decide to lend that expensive jacket to your brother, because it\'s yours and you wanna share it with the people you want. Since the moment you paid for that article, Valentino has nothing to do with it. It\'s legally yours. It cannot say what can you do with it or what cannot. It\'s yours and you can burn it if want.

Just try to figure out that you buy a Ferrari and the contract says that you cannot lend that car to anybody. WHY? Why I cannot lend MY CAR to a friend? Or to my father? IT IS MINE.

So here you have the same ethical problem. If I paid for a Metallica disc, who will avoid me to share it with my friends through emule? It\'s mine. I can do with it what I want. Metallica cannot tell me what I can do and what I cannot.. because since I paid for it the album is mine, not of Metallica. Another thing is that you think: "ok, share my disc with 1 million people is not perhaps right for the sake of the authors", but IMO it\'s legal.

If companies are sooooo interested in avoiding sharing and piracy I can tell you 101 effective solutions. First: better footage. Second: Drop prices. Third: etc, etc...

Here the problem is that companies think that they can tell you what you must do with your articles and I think that\'s legally wrong.

The difference is that you cannot instantly make an exact copy of the jacket or the Ferrari that is so good, it\'s functionally identical to the original.  Therefore, both your friend and you cannot be driving the Ferrari at the same time.  If you each want your own Ferrari, you have to buy two of them.

As you well know, with audio CDs you can make a copy that is virtually indistinguishable from the original.  The only differences will be the printing on the label, and the booklet that comes with it.

I\'m not trying to defend the RIAA here...  I have always held that it\'s their GREED that is causing all their problems.  There are people who would be willing to pay a little in order to stay within the law, but only if the price is REASONABLE.  I was totally prepared to buy an audio CD a couple weeks ago, and the lowest price I could find online was $16.99.  It was UN-F**KING-BELIEVABLE.  No way was I going to pay that much, even though I can afford it.  I would have paid $10.99 though.  No question.  The recording industry needs to wake up to the fact that a price adjustment, and increased respect for their customers is what is needed, not more idiotic lawsuits and legislation.

So far, from what I read in your post, you haven\'t exposed any legal fallacies.  However, for the sake of argument, I\'ll reply to each of your examples and show you the flaws they contain.

First off, you have your example of the jacket.  The reason why you can lend it to him and no one says anything about it or complains is because the two of you can\'t wear it at the same time.  Either of you is wearing it, but never at the same time.  You can get technical with it supposing you replicated the jacket with the same material in the same style so the two were identical in every way, but you could be fined for that if you give them away on the street and possibly even arrested.

Then there\'s the example of the Ferrari...  Anyone can drive the Ferrari, but those who do need to be insured to drive it.  If they are not and that person gets in an accident, they\'re fundamentally screwed for everything they\'re worth and your car becomes useless and your insurance rates skyrocket.

Now you have the Metallica CD -- sure, you can lend it to your friends, but the point is, in the comfort of your own respective homes, the two of you are not listening to it at the same time.  If you made a copy, and gave them a copy of it, then you are breaking the copyright act which is exactly the same thing as I spoke of with your jacket scenario.  Why do you think copying games and distributing them is illegal or programs or OS\' or anything else that can be reproduced for free for that matter?

It\'s the same things for books as well.  If I reproduced the original screenplay for Star Wars on the web, I\'d be given a cease and desist order from George Lucas in seconds and if I didn\'t, I\'d be sued and prosecuted simply because the script is reprinted in a book that can be purchased.  It\'s the same thing as stealing no matter how you sugar coat it.  All because it\'s easier and because everyone is doing it, doesn\'t make it right.

I’m not trying to say I’m above everyone because I have fractured an occasional law from time to time regarding this whole subject, but I’m not going to lie to myself and convince myself that what I’m doing is right by striking back at the illegal record producers or profiteering programmers or the evil Nazi practices of Microsoft.  

As for iTunes, I\'m going to get it without a doubt as soon as the program comes out for Windows in the coming 3 months.  I have no gumption with paying .99 for a song when the latter is paying 15.99-17.99 for a CD where only 4 songs are worth listening to.

How about getting 14 songs you want, for absolutly nothing??!!?

Thats the system I\'m using, and it seems to work fine!

iTunes is a great idea.  They are trying to get more apple users by starting this as an apple-only d/l.  If they come out with a web interface then I\'ll be looking at becoming a customer myself.  However I\'m not down with these file format restrictions.  If I can\'t burn it to CD or convert it to .ogg I\'m not going to be interested in it.

**** it....

Im sure sales havent gone down that much.


These thousands of unknown bands are being discovered through free music every day, musical industry as a community is booming.

Pay for music? God damn, if the musicians need the money so bad why are they owning 3 houses, 12 expensive cars, and their own plane? Im sure their life is terrible :rolleyes:

Im gonna continue to download free music- until I\'m caught. And they can try to bust my ass for piracy.

Where I wanted to go dudes is that Valentino and Ferrari are also lossing clients and money if you share their products, as well as music.

[Living-In-Clip]

I love dumb teen angst (note: Spudz ). You have zero clue about the issue at hand, but it\'s the "cool thing" to do. It\'s a f**kin\' herd menatlity and I\'m sure if everyone jumped off a cliff, you\'d do it also. Hopefully, they will get you for piracy, though I don\'t think it\'d matter, as you are underage and your parents will end up havin\' to pay the lawsuit off.

And Adan, to my knowledge the cops cannot question you if you downloaded music, just because they see you have some cd-r\'s  with a famous band name on it. They would need a warrant for that. If they said something, you could refuse to answer it.

Also, I don\'t see how some of you cannot "get it". Sharing music is illegal. You are making a copy and givin\' it out to people. You can make your copy for back up, but nothing more. You cannot give it out. That is a violation of the law. It\'s really quite simple.