Free Music/Video Downloading. Is it stealing?

amy

Sorry if this has already been posted, I hadn't seen it. If so, please close this. If not:

On average $1.00 for a song, $2.00 for a video. With MP3's as popular as they are, millions of people are filling them up with music and videos, some by buying them, some buy quot;Illigallyquot; Downloading them. An MP3 has held up to as much as 80 Gigabytes, which, if filled up, is a LOT of money.

Some people do not want to pay these expenses, when, in the long run,  is  a lot of money. Programs such as LimeWire and Bearshare have been introduced, which allow people to download videos and music completely free. Many find it to be a blessing, so they won't have to pay thousands of dollars to fill up their MP3's.

Though, with the rise of these programs, has risen many punishments. Fines of over 100 dollars for illigal downloading. Though many have been caught doing this, many more continue to do it. There is no real way of catching everyone who does it, which means many people will continue to do it.

Now, the important part. Many people (like myself) are Christians, and therefor see stealing as a sin, and unacceptable. Many people against the free downloading are calling it quot;Stealing.quot; My question to you is, do you consider it stealing?

I, for one, do NOT consider it stealing in any way. My reason for this is:

Somebody walks into Best Buy. They take a CD, and run out. This is stealing. There are limited quantities of that CD in the world, and that person who took it has lowered the amount by one, meaning one LESS CD that someone can buy.

Somebody is sitting at their computer, downloading music, free. They download a song for free, put it on their computer, and that's that. There is STILL and UNLIMITED supply of that MP3 song. Millions of people can download it, and there will STILL be an UNLIMITED supply of that MP3 song.

If something never runs out, taking it should not be considered stealing. You might as well charge people for washing their hands in a public sink, or for using a public toilet.

Share your thoughts.

threads been done.

sorry.

Yea its stealing.

But I dont care *goes back to limewire*

Yup*downloads a new album*

Yes, its stealing but who cares. Download first, buy later.

yes it's stealing.... But as what Knight said... quot;WHO CARES?quot;

It being stealing or quot;something elsequot; in the eyes of God I'll have to leave up to Him to decide.

It's clearly illegal though.  The consumer does not get to directly decide what something should sell at, the person selling the product does.  All the consumer gets to do is decide if it's worth it to them to buy it at that price or not.


Originally Posted by EvilMoogleIt's clearly illegal though. The consumer does not get to directly decide what something should sell at, the person selling the product does. All the consumer gets to do is decide if it's worth it to them to buy it at that price or not.

Illegal it may be, because that is what the government has decided on, though I do not think it is stealing. And in any case, is it really that important? All in all, the music artist is getting ripped off anyway. It costs one dollar to download a song, and you know how much money the artist gets? 3 CENTS. I want to know why the marketing people are getting 97 cents...


Originally Posted by SandManGaaraIt costs one dollar to download a song, and you know how much money the artist gets? 3 CENTS. I want to know why the marketing people are getting 97 cents...

And when you download it illegially the artist gets?  0 cents.

I've always wondered why it's okay with some people for the artist to get nothing, but not okay for them to only get a little.


Originally Posted by EvilMoogleAnd when you download it illegially the artist gets?  0 cents.

I've always wondered why it's okay with some people for the artist to get nothing, but not okay for them to only get a little.

But you have to wonder, with all the money the artist has, does the 3 cents really make a difference? It's the one dollar coming out of the pockets of us average Joes' that really leaves a mark.


Originally Posted by SandManGaaraBut you have to wonder, with all the money the artist has, does the 3 cents really make a difference? It's the one dollar coming out of the pockets of us average Joes' that really leaves a mark.

Ah, so it's okay to steal from rich people?  If they didn't need/want the money, they'd either stop making music or start releasing the music for free.  Either way it's the artist's decision, not the consumer's.

It is considered quot;stealingquot; or quot;wrongquot; but they have enough money so who gives.

I could care less. I download anyway.

You could connect your radio to your computer with a simple double ended cord. You can use quot;sound recorderquot; to save any song playing onto your computer with relatively good quality with a little work, same thing with cds, and the ones that don't let the regular computer users copy them. They can't do anything about it.  There is no way to track that sort of thing. They should give up, the percentage of all the people caught out of all the people who do it is so much smaller than for material goods. No matter how hard they try, people will always do it. End of story.


Originally Posted by NoOne100There is no way to track that sort of thing. They should give up, the percentage of all the people caught out of all the people who do it is so much smaller than for material goods. No matter how hard they try, people will always do it. End of story.

So, basically your argument is if you can't stop everyone who commits a crime, you might as well not enforce the law at all?  I'll be the first to admit that the RIAA is rather overzealous in how they're going about it, but that doesn't give anyone a right to break the law.  Society wouldn't function if that were the case.

And just for your information, making a copy of a CD you own for your own use is legal.

its not stealing. Its quot;samplingquot;  and its funny how ppl bring this issue up and watch naruto and read the manga on this site...


Originally Posted by EvilMoogleAh, so it's okay to steal from rich people?  If they didn't need/want the money, they'd either stop making music or start releasing the music for free.  Either way it's the artist's decision, not the consumer's.

I see what you're saying. I just don't think that an expense as small as 3 cents should be so important as to fining and arresting people. I also think whatever WE pay should ALL go to the ARTIST. I would not mind paying 3 cents for a song...

Why don't music companies make an alternative from all of this...something along the lines of:

You let the consumer make a list of the songs he/she wants. A maximum of, oh say, 20. The person pays $10.00, $.50 a song, a much more fair price. The company doing the sale makes a CD of the songs and mails it to a person. The person now has the CD, and can save the songs on their computer and put them on the MP3. We'd still be paying, but it'd be a more fair deal...