Gene Simmons: The fans destroyed the record industry.

[shgshg]

"Criminal act of dishonest assumption of the rights of the true owner of a tangible or intangible property by treating it as one's own"

Unauthorized copying clearly does not meet this definition. Which is why unauthorized copying is not theft and is never prosecuted as theft.

 

[rupe]

"Criminal act of dishonest assumption of the rights of the true owner of a tangible or intangible property by treating it as one's own"

Unauthorized copying clearly does not meet this definition. Which is why unauthorized copying is not theft and is never prosecuted as theft.

Sorry, but you're simply wrong. Downloading copywritten material that has not been made available for free by the owner of the copyright is clearly an "act of dishonest assumption of the rights of the true owner" in that the true owner expects a fee for the transfer of those rights and has not authorized its sharing.

FWIW, I just conversed with my lead singer (who happens to be an attorney) about the subject. Care to back up the source of your "expertise"?

 

[kasperjensen]

Who gives a flying monkeys what it's called? It's not right. End of story.

 

[shgshg]

If you've ever watched a youtube gear demo of someone playing Van Halen riffs, you're guilty of illegally downloading copyrighted content. Unless, of course, you had legal permission from the composers to be downloading a copy of their work.

I'm guessing you didn't.

 

[TrueTone500]

If you've ever watched a youtube gear demo of someone playing Van Halen riffs, you're guilty of illegally downloading copyrighted content. Unless, of course, you had legal permission from the composers to be downloading a copy of their work.

I'm guessing you didn't.

 

[Purpleibby]

shgshg........no one is buying it.... I have a suggestion for you and other illegal downloaders.... send a little message to the artists, all of them telling them you've illegally downloaded their hard work and then tell them you have the "right" to own it...then any other artform or product that can be downloaded, software and movies(music can't be singled out by your logic, it can be downloaded afterall) etc. and tell them you've pirated their hard work and send them a message saying fuck them for expecting to be paid..then relay that information to various law enforcement establishments.....since you're so in the right you should have no fear in doing so and we should see some responses here pretty soon...keep us posted

 

[rp108]

I am very surprised to see people justifying illegal downloading. The only time I think its justified is when an album is no longer available (physical or digital) and the cd is selling from some douche on Ebay for $50. The band doesn't see a nickel from the Ebay sale so why support the seller?

Otherwise, no matter how you look at it, it's ripping off the band. I also strongly disagree with the "I download it to see if I like it". Do you go into the super market and open up a bag of chips to see if you like them before you purchase? There are tons of youtube videos of bands and samples of the albums on the distribution websites (iTunes, Amazon, etc) so there is no reason to not be able to test it out before you purchase. Hell, just download the single for 99 cents and see for yourself.

 

[Purpleibby]

I am very surprised to see people justifying illegal downloading. The only time I think its justified is when an album is no longer available (physical or digital) and the cd is selling from some douche on Ebay for $50. The band doesn't see a nickel from the Ebay sale so why support the seller?

Otherwise, no matter how you look at it, it's ripping off the band. I also strongly disagree with the "I download it to see if I like it". Do you go into the super market and open up a bag of chips to see if you like them before you purchase? There are tons of youtube videos of bands and samples of the albums on the distribution websites (iTunes, Amazon, etc) so there is no reason to not be able to test it out before you purchase. Hell, just download the single for 99 cents and see for yourself.

Right on, excellent post!

+1

 

[shgshg]

I am very surprised to see people justifying illegal downloading. The only time I think its justified is WHEN I REALLY REALLY WANT THE THING.

Edited so your message was more obvious.

If you've ever watched a youtube gear demo of someone playing Van Halen riffs, you're guilty of illegally downloading copyrighted content. Unless, of course, you had legal permission from the composers to be downloading a copy of their work.

I'm guessing you didn't.

What part don't you understand?

 

[rp108]

I am very surprised to see people justifying illegal downloading. The only time I think its justified is WHEN I REALLY REALLY WANT THE THING.

Edited so your message was more obvious.

If you've ever watched a youtube gear demo of someone playing Van Halen riffs, you're guilty of illegally downloading copyrighted content. Unless, of course, you had legal permission from the composers to be downloading a copy of their work.

I'm guessing you didn't.

What part don't you understand?

I have no idea how you read my post and came away with that.

 

[satannica]

I am very surprised to see people justifying illegal downloading. The only time I think its justified is WHEN I REALLY REALLY WANT THE THING.

Edited so your message was more obvious.

If you've ever watched a youtube gear demo of someone playing Van Halen riffs, you're guilty of illegally downloading copyrighted content. Unless, of course, you had legal permission from the composers to be downloading a copy of their work.

I'm guessing you didn't.

What part don't you understand?

I have no idea how you read my post and came away with that.

You offered a well formed, sensible and realistic standpoint. However, you're talking to an entitled hipster whose entitled to whatever he wants to take.

 

[rupe]

If you've ever watched a youtube gear demo of someone playing Van Halen riffs, you're guilty of illegally downloading copyrighted content. Unless, of course, you had legal permission from the composers to be downloading a copy of their work.

I'm guessing you didn't.

Wow, I didn't realize that when I watched a Youtube video that I was illegally downloading it. I'll have to find all of those illegal downloads and remove them from my computer.


Ok, I'm back. Funny thing though...I can't seem to find any of these video files on my computer???

 

[satannica]

If you've ever watched a youtube gear demo of someone playing Van Halen riffs, you're guilty of illegally downloading copyrighted content. Unless, of course, you had legal permission from the composers to be downloading a copy of their work.

I'm guessing you didn't.

Wow, I didn't realize that when I watched a Youtube video that I was illegally downloading it. I'll have to find all of those illegal downloads and remove them from my computer.


Ok, I'm back. Funny thing though...I can't seem to find any of these video files on my computer???

Idiot! Didn't you know that Van Halen's sole source of income is through playing Eruption streamed on YouTube? The guy who's playing Eruption badly on his Epiphone SG is simply ruining him. I remember Van Halen saying many times, "Downloading is just dandy, it's all those people not pretending to be me trying to play my music on YouTube while making no attempt to disguise the fact that they are not me. Man, I'm hurting from that!"

Ah wait now, no... I'm wrong. It turns out it is actually the 20,000 seeds of his last album which he's now getting zero in return for that means he's not getting money for it.

Well, it's a good job he already has himself established, eh? I can only imagine where he'd be right now if he was right at the start, unable to make a nickle from any damn thing he did and people like this genius blasting him every chance he gets for even trying. I'd expect he'd be on guitar forums telling other people what a great idea digital theft is and how he deserves everything for free!

World today... sometimes, it just deserves to burn!

 

[maddnotez]

Copyright laws and cover songs are a whole different chapter.

 

[shgshg]

This is fun.

I have no idea how you read my post and came away with that.

You acknowledged that the activity is illegal and then described the situations in which you'd do it anyway. The fact that a copyright holder isn't selling something when you want to buy it doesn't give you license to obtain it illegally.

If you've ever watched a youtube gear demo of someone playing Van Halen riffs, you're guilty of illegally downloading copyrighted content. Unless, of course, you had legal permission from the composers to be downloading a copy of their work.

I'm guessing you didn't.

Wow, I didn't realize that when I watched a Youtube video that I was illegally downloading it.

That you didn't realize it was illegal doesn't change anything. A composer wrote some music and you obtained a copy of a recording of a performance of that music without being given permission by the composer or compensating the composer for his work.

Gee, anyone would think copyright laws were totally unenforceable in the Internet era and either ignored or totally misunderstood by practically the entire Internet-connected population of the world.

Oh wait. They are.

 

[rp108]

This is fun.

I have no idea how you read my post and came away with that.

You acknowledged that the activity is illegal and then described the situations in which you'd do it anyway. The fact that a copyright holder isn't selling something when you want to buy it doesn't give you license to obtain it illegally.

If you've ever watched a youtube gear demo of someone playing Van Halen riffs, you're guilty of illegally downloading copyrighted content. Unless, of course, you had legal permission from the composers to be downloading a copy of their work.

I'm guessing you didn't.

Wow, I didn't realize that when I watched a Youtube video that I was illegally downloading it.

That you didn't realize it was illegal doesn't change anything. A composer wrote some music and you obtained a copy of a recording of a performance of that music without being given permission by the composer or compensating the composer for his work.

Gee, anyone would think copyright laws were totally unenforceable in the Internet era and either ignored or totally misunderstood by practically the entire Internet-connected population of the world.

Oh wait. They are.

From the example I gave, it pretty clear that the author is no longer in commercial use and the material falls under fair use or possibly public domain depending on the artist. My example is an edge case, an exception to the rule. Not everything is black and white.

On that note, I think arguing over edge cases is ridiculous as the more prominent issue is for working artist in commercial use, which it looks like we agree on.

 

[rupe]

If you've ever watched a youtube gear demo of someone playing Van Halen riffs, you're guilty of illegally downloading copyrighted content. Unless, of course, you had legal permission from the composers to be downloading a copy of their work.

I'm guessing you didn't.

Wow, I didn't realize that when I watched a YouTube video that I was illegally downloading it.

That you didn't realize it was illegal doesn't change anything. A composer wrote some music and you obtained a copy of a recording of a performance of that music without being given permission by the composer or compensating the composer for his work.

Gee, anyone would think copyright laws were totally unenforceable in the Internet era and either ignored or totally misunderstood by practically the entire Internet-connected population of the world.

Oh wait. They are.

That point went right over your head...the point being that by simply watching/listening to something on YouTube doesn't mean that you've downloaded it. I can't go to my computer now and burn a copy of it...I didn't "take" it, I simply heard it and would have to return to YouTube to hear it again. By that logic, any time I hear a song being played on a CD that I didn't buy, I've just illegally downloaded it.

 

[Atropos_Project]

To put it even more simply: if downloading files is stealing, then taking someone's photograph is kidnapping.

Downloading an album is, essentially, receiving a product without compensation to the artist. If you are to argue that this isn't theft, then certainly you can make a case that all live shows should also have no admission fee.

 

[metalmaniac93]

If nobody is illegally downloading your music - you are not even relevant. It has been this way many years.

I agree!!! So I guess sharing music is also bad. I download and share music for free and if I like it; I buy it. I also own over 20,000 or so CDs and a shitload of concert DVDs, so I have spent my share of money on bands over the years by buying their LPs, cassettes, CDs. DVDs and concert shirts.

 

[311boogieman]

Wow, some of you need to learn how to copy the correct quote or delete the parts you are not quoting.

#2. I loved Kiss back in the day, but it is pretty hard to watch Gene talk about anything - and blaming the fans is weak.

c.) I don't think you can blame the fans or the technology. If want to blame anything blame the anonymity that the internet and ISPs give people. You are just seen as an IP Address (and you can further hide behind a proxy service). You don't have to step up and say, "Hi, I'm John Smith, and I'd like to download this song without permission or without paying. My phone number is this and email and home address is this. No one would do that if they had to provide that information.

And I agree with whomever said that you are not 'making it' if people are not illegally downloading your songs. Sounds like Rock & Roll to me

There is no black and white perfect answer to this. Times have changed. You have to adjust.

Tape trading is a completely different world to digital downloading. For one, a cassette recorded off the radio was not a quality or permanent recording and chances are a listener would end up buying an official release anyway.