KBear Posted August 6, 2008 Share Posted August 6, 2008 (edited) know there was an idea floating around about building in a fee to mp3 players so that when people buy these machines a chunk of money goes to the industry - and once someone pays that fee they are free to download music. I'm not sure where they are on that idea but this is the type of solution they need to implement.Can you elaborate?Basically let's say an mp3 player costs $100. The price might go up to $120 and that extra $20 would go to the record companies to compensate them for the money lost due to downloading, considering that most people who buy an mp3 player will likely download music. Or to view it another way, that $20 is a pre-payment for the allowance to download music in the future at no charge. Edited August 6, 2008 by KBear Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DirtyDeeds Posted August 6, 2008 Share Posted August 6, 2008 know there was an idea floating around about building in a fee to mp3 players so that when people buy these machines a chunk of money goes to the industry - and once someone pays that fee they are free to download music. I'm not sure where they are on that idea but this is the type of solution they need to implement.Can you elaborate?Basically let's say an mp3 player costs $100. The price might go up to $120 and that extra $20 would go to the record companies to compensate them for the money lost due to downloading, considering that most people who buy an mp3 player will likely download music. Or to view it another way, that $20 is a pre-payment for the allowance to download music in the future at no charge.No offense to whomever came up with that idea (not that they're here anyway), but that's a seriously horrible idea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin Posted August 7, 2008 Author Share Posted August 7, 2008 know there was an idea floating around about building in a fee to mp3 players so that when people buy these machines a chunk of money goes to the industry - and once someone pays that fee they are free to download music. I'm not sure where they are on that idea but this is the type of solution they need to implement.Can you elaborate?Basically let's say an mp3 player costs $100. The price might go up to $120 and that extra $20 would go to the record companies to compensate them for the money lost due to downloading, considering that most people who buy an mp3 player will likely download music. Or to view it another way, that $20 is a pre-payment for the allowance to download music in the future at no charge.No offense to whomever came up with that idea (not that they're here anyway), but that's a seriously horrible idea.I agree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midnight Rambler Posted August 7, 2008 Share Posted August 7, 2008 (edited) The sense of entitlement here is disappointing.I hear ya. I sorta feel like downloading is cheating kinda, like when u actually used to have to buy the music u listened to, in a way it meant more to u. Like when i was a kid id save up to buy my favourite albums and then when i started full time work it was fukin great coz i could buy a couple a albums a week. I dont think kids 2day apreciate how easy they got it when it comes to listenin to music. Fuck i sound like an old cunt, but anyway i do think its stealing, especially when ur downloading music from bands that arent that big - i mean some of those bands need that mooney u know. Edited August 7, 2008 by Midnight Rambler Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lagofala Posted August 7, 2008 Share Posted August 7, 2008 Its worth it..You guys in the states have so much different stuff.Down here its limited and expensive.I would never get certain albums like Angel Down or Kind Of Blue in my local music store. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marky Posted August 7, 2008 Share Posted August 7, 2008 Yeah, I couldn't get Libertad, I was considering downloading, but I eventually ebayed it...but still, albums by artists that don't neccesarily break the top 40...its very difficult for the modern listener. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin Posted August 7, 2008 Author Share Posted August 7, 2008 Its worth it..You guys in the states have so much different stuff.Down here its limited and expensive.I would never get certain albums like Angel Down or Kind Of Blue in my local music store.Yeah but your J-Pop selection is probably 1023x better than here. Wanna trade? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KBear Posted August 7, 2008 Share Posted August 7, 2008 know there was an idea floating around about building in a fee to mp3 players so that when people buy these machines a chunk of money goes to the industry - and once someone pays that fee they are free to download music. I'm not sure where they are on that idea but this is the type of solution they need to implement.Can you elaborate?Basically let's say an mp3 player costs $100. The price might go up to $120 and that extra $20 would go to the record companies to compensate them for the money lost due to downloading, considering that most people who buy an mp3 player will likely download music. Or to view it another way, that $20 is a pre-payment for the allowance to download music in the future at no charge.No offense to whomever came up with that idea (not that they're here anyway), but that's a seriously horrible idea.But do you have a better one? They have to find some way of making people pay or go out of business instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin Posted August 7, 2008 Author Share Posted August 7, 2008 People are buying hardware when they purchase an MP3 player, not music. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KBear Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 (edited) If only people could be trusted to pay for their music the way they pay for their hardware.That said, if you could download hardware without paying for it then you can bet at least 9 out of 10 people would. Edited August 8, 2008 by KBear Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lagofala Posted August 8, 2008 Share Posted August 8, 2008 (edited) You can download hardware?? How would that happen? Edited August 8, 2008 by lagofala Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kevin Posted August 8, 2008 Author Share Posted August 8, 2008 (edited) If only people could be trusted to pay for their music the way they pay for their hardware.That said, if you could download hardware without paying for it then you can bet at least 9 out of 10 people would., let me download some GaAs and then run un update to make an ICBut if they included a "we think you'll for sure download music, so we're tacking on 20 bucks to your mp3 k?" cost, then I'm fairly sure illegal downloads would go way up. I, for one, would be very pissed at that happening. Edited August 8, 2008 by kevin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vince41090 Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 Just because the RIAA says it's "stealing", doesn't mean it is. Artists like Jack Johnson, NIN, and Radiohead don't call it "stealing". They share their music with their fans and give them the option to buy their music.If anything is stealing, the Record Industry has been "stealing" from its fans for way to many years by charging $10-$20 for a Disc in a cheap plastic case with some printed paper. Refusal to adapt to popular technology is what's killing the record industry; not illegal downloading.But to be fair to the industry, I'll download everything I can find from Ruckus and then convert it with my "legal" copy of Tunebite so it will play on my iPod Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
estranged 16 Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 (edited) yeah the music business is still trapped in the 80's/90's. people dont buy music anymore. except for maybe itunes and people who just like owning a physical copy of an album. they need to adapt to today's society and find new ways to make profit Edited August 9, 2008 by estranged 16 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Black Sabbath Posted August 9, 2008 Share Posted August 9, 2008 I'll download the album, and if I like it enough, I'll buy the album itself.Downloading an album isn't satisfying at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JDRM Posted August 31, 2008 Share Posted August 31, 2008 I download a shit ton of anime mostly because it's so expensive. I'll buy box sets of series I really like (Lucky Star, Haruhi, Azumanga) but I can't afford to spend 60$ on 1 dvd for a series I might not like. Sometimes certain anime get hard to find online once they're licensed too. But that's what /r/ and /a/ are for.You go on 4 chan? Damn that site is fucking weird And yes, i pirate everything; DVD's, ISO's, Music, DVD Screener's etc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.