Limewire shut down

[Alg]

I suppose I'll go steal stuff them. I'm not willing to pay for it, therefore it has no value, and the people I robbed are to blame for not making the product worth paying for.

 

Right.

 

Perhaps you may want to check your sense of entitlement. If you feel that you deserve a product because it isn't worth your money, the problem lies with you, not the people whose product doesn't conform to your oh-so-high standards. Your opinions and music tastes aren't as important as you like to think.

 

It's people like you that make me hate digital piracy. Seriously.

[EarthySun]

I suppose I'll go steal stuff them. I'm not willing to pay for it, therefore it has no value, and the people I robbed are to blame for not making the product worth paying for.

 

Right.

 

Perhaps you may want to check your sense of entitlement. If you feel that you deserve a product because it isn't worth your money, the problem lies with you, not the people whose product doesn't conform to your oh-so-high standards. Your opinions and music tastes aren't as important as you like to think.

 

It's people like you that make me hate digital piracy. Seriously.

 

I really only pirate half the stuff I get. :\ If I can't find it on iTunes or anywhere (German rock and rap music, some good Spanish music), I'll see if I can pirate it. I'll also pirate it if I have no money on my iTunes account.

[Alg]

I really only pirate half the stuff I get. :\ If I can't find it on iTunes or anywhere (German rock and rap music, some good Spanish music), I'll see if I can pirate it. I'll also pirate it if I have no money on my iTunes account.

Not directed at you :razz:

[Danqazmlp]

 

You want free music? Learn to whistle.

:thumbup: :thumbup:

 

Artists deserve to be paid for their work.

I would agree...

 

If every penny of what we paid actually WENT to the artists. Either directly to them or for direct use in helping them continue their work...

 

But alas, it does not. It lines the pockets of filthy rich executive bosses who couldn't give a damn about genuinely supporting artists.

 

There is a fundamental rule of marketing and that is A product or service is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it. Therefore loss due to piracy = $0

Suing people is a very lucrative business model, entire businesses have sprung up for the sole purpose of suing people on behalf of content owners. The film and music industry has also given birth to allot of organised crime based on the notion of stopping piracy. There are criminal syndicates out there who attack pirate servers for a fee..

 

Piracy really does no harm to music and film and they know it. But they don't want to admit it because then they could not sue innocent people.

I disagree. Unless you are some sort of Godless infidel, you would pay money for good music. With pirating, you don't have to. Therein lies the harm to the industry.

 

Yes, when it's offered for nothing the value is nothing. But if it were not underpriced, you would be paying money for it, in some way or another.

 

Like I said it's only worth what someone is willing to pay.

If someone is not willing to pay for it then it's because it is not worth that much. If they do feel that it's worth the money being asked then they will pay for it.

 

Piracy can't harm the industy due to the rules of economics. If people aren't prepared to pay you for your work it's time to move on and to something else, this applies to all aspects of our society. If my employer was not prepared to pay me what I consider acceptable I would to work for them. If I produce content that people don't find valuable enough to pay for then I'll either stop doing it or work to improve said content.

 

Piracy has no impact on sales I own over 140 DVDs and it is actualyy faster, cheaper and easier to download those movies. Obviously if a movie is not worth paying for then I won't pay for it.

 

 

 

I disagree. That concept goes out the window as soon as you are able to get said item for free. for example, If I could walk into my hallway and get a free pair of shoes I would. This would then stop me needing to buy them in a store. This doesn't mean that they would not be worth it in the store, it simply means I can get them for free for no effort. We cannot say at all whether removing piracy completely would boost or decrease record sales. Everything would be guesswork as human behaviour is very hard to predict. Often it is not only the price which is the deciding factor. Things such as effort needed to go and buy something where downloading illegally can be more simple for example.

 

As I say, nobody is going to turn down free things, but that does not mean the original product would not be worth buying.

[Dax]

Breaking quote chain to post my opinion.

 

The last time, and first time I used Limewire, I was a complete noob, gave me my first virus, and I say HAHAHA. Serves you right, Limewire, you messed me up for like three days when my dad was really pissed at me.

[Furah]

I suppose I'll go steal stuff them. I'm not willing to pay for it, therefore it has no value, and the people I robbed are to blame for not making the product worth paying for.

Yes, because file-sharing is the same thing as theft.

[Alg]

I suppose I'll go steal stuff them. I'm not willing to pay for it, therefore it has no value, and the people I robbed are to blame for not making the product worth paying for.

Yes, because file-sharing is the same thing as theft.

I've said that exact thing before, probably on either this thread or the other one. I picked that example because it isn't the same thing.

 

Not that it was the point anyway. That bit was about the 'value being what people are willing to pay for it' bit.

[Furah]

I suppose I'll go steal stuff them. I'm not willing to pay for it, therefore it has no value, and the people I robbed are to blame for not making the product worth paying for.

Yes, because file-sharing is the same thing as theft.

I've said that exact thing before, probably on either this thread or the other one. I picked that example because it isn't the same thing.

 

Not that it was the point anyway. That bit was about the 'value being what people are willing to pay for it' bit.

This is the internet, try to find what they're trying to say. Like you would with a child or a special person. He's trying to say that enough people are file-sharing for the current cost of music to be under heavy scrutiny.

[Alg]

This is the internet, try to find what they're trying to say. Like you would with a child or a special person. He's trying to say that enough people are file-sharing for the current cost of music to be under heavy scrutiny.

I did any my conclusion was that it was the weakest "justification" for piracy I have ever heard. The guy is effectively saying that if people pirate, the blame falls on the maker of the product for not making a better product.

 

That only works if you're willing to ignore the fact that people pirate because it's free, not because the product isn't worth money. If some guy came out tomorrow with the universal greatest song ever created, people would still pirate it, regardless of the cost.

 

The music industry could go through an amazing change that would make it the paragon for all industry and people would still pirate.

[Will H]

This is the internet, try to find what they're trying to say. Like you would with a child or a special person. He's trying to say that enough people are file-sharing for the current cost of music to be under heavy scrutiny.

I did any my conclusion was that it was the weakest "justification" for piracy I have ever heard. The guy is effectively saying that if people pirate, the blame falls on the maker of the product for not making a better product.

 

That only works if you're willing to ignore the fact that people pirate because it's free, not because the product isn't worth money. If some guy came out tomorrow with the universal greatest song ever created, people would still pirate it, regardless of the cost.

 

The music industry could go through an amazing change that would make it the paragon for all industry and people would still pirate.

 

Which is why music should be a service, not a product. If the delivery of music was streamlined to be better than piracy (and believe me, piracy leaves a lot to be desired in this respect), people would pay for it (the service).

[DaN]

I suppose I'll go steal stuff them. I'm not willing to pay for it, therefore it has no value, and the people I robbed are to blame for not making the product worth paying for.

 

Right.

 

Perhaps you may want to check your sense of entitlement. If you feel that you deserve a product because it isn't worth your money, the problem lies with you, not the people whose product doesn't conform to your oh-so-high standards. Your opinions and music tastes aren't as important as you like to think.

 

It's people like you that make me hate digital piracy. Seriously.

 

Piracy is not theft. All the bandwidth in a bit-torrent swarm is supplied by other people sharing that file. Nothing is being stolen not even the bandwidth or CPU cycles required to share the file. Please do not resort to false analogies.

 

Sharing is a natural part of our society, and I have yet to encounter a human lacking any generosity at all. If I want to share a movie off my computer then where is the harm, as I am simply reproducing a fresh copy that is then given to another person free of charge. Some day we may have the nano-technology to allow us to make perfect copies of tangible objects as well, and that will truly be a fantastic era for our society.

 

 

I disagree. That concept goes out the window as soon as you are able to get said item for free. for example, If I could walk into my hallway and get a free pair of shoes I would. This would then stop me needing to buy them in a store. This doesn't mean that they would not be worth it in the store, it simply means I can get them for free for no effort. We cannot say at all whether removing piracy completely would boost or decrease record sales. Everything would be guesswork as human behaviour is very hard to predict. Often it is not only the price which is the deciding factor. Things such as effort needed to go and buy something where downloading illegally can be more simple for example.

 

As I say, nobody is going to turn down free things, but that does not mean the original product would not be worth buying.

 

People still buy DVDs and even my own DVD collection supports the rule A product or service is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it.

 

As for obtaining a free pair of shoes. If you are not willing to go to the store and instead are contempt with the free shoes from the hall way then there is nothing wrong with that. Just as there is nothing wrong with downloading a movie instead of going to the store to buy it. If you like the shoes/movie and decide you want to pay for it then you can still go to the store and buy them. I have purchased 147 DVDs of my favourite movies to date, these movies offered to me free of charge were worth something to me and so they where paid for at an agreed price.

[Danqazmlp]

I suppose I'll go steal stuff them. I'm not willing to pay for it, therefore it has no value, and the people I robbed are to blame for not making the product worth paying for.

 

Right.

 

Perhaps you may want to check your sense of entitlement. If you feel that you deserve a product because it isn't worth your money, the problem lies with you, not the people whose product doesn't conform to your oh-so-high standards. Your opinions and music tastes aren't as important as you like to think.

 

It's people like you that make me hate digital piracy. Seriously.

 

Piracy is not theft. All the bandwidth in a bit-torrent swarm is supplied by other people sharing that file. Nothing is being stolen not even the bandwidth or CPU cycles required to share the file. Please do not resort to false analogies.

 

Sharing is a natural part of our society, and I have yet to encounter a human lacking any generosity at all. If I want to share a movie off my computer then where is the harm, as I am simply reproducing a fresh copy that is then given to another person free of charge. Some day we may have the nano-technology to allow us to make perfect copies of tangible objects as well, and that will truly be a fantastic era for our society.

 

 

I disagree. That concept goes out the window as soon as you are able to get said item for free. for example, If I could walk into my hallway and get a free pair of shoes I would. This would then stop me needing to buy them in a store. This doesn't mean that they would not be worth it in the store, it simply means I can get them for free for no effort. We cannot say at all whether removing piracy completely would boost or decrease record sales. Everything would be guesswork as human behaviour is very hard to predict. Often it is not only the price which is the deciding factor. Things such as effort needed to go and buy something where downloading illegally can be more simple for example.

 

As I say, nobody is going to turn down free things, but that does not mean the original product would not be worth buying.

 

People still buy DVDs and even my own DVD collection supports the rule A product or service is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it.

 

As for obtaining a free pair of shoes. If you are not willing to go to the store and instead are contempt with the free shoes from the hall way then there is nothing wrong with that. Just as there is nothing wrong with downloading a movie instead of going to the store to buy it. If you like the shoes/movie and decide you want to pay for it then you can still go to the store and buy them. I have purchased 147 DVDs of my favourite movies to date, these movies offered to me free of charge were worth something to me and so they where paid for at an agreed price.

 

 

You seem to be unfamiliar with copyright which is plastered all over most media. In short, copies made for sharing or distribution are illegal. You can pander around on your non existent moral high ground all you like, but the fact is, it is illegal to willingly share copyrighted material without consent of those who created it. If you were to buy a CD, then create 500 copies all burnt to disks, then hand them out on the street to anybody that wanted them, you would be liable for arrest. That is exactly what is happening with torrenting. Those taking the copy are doing a crime if they know they are getting it for free (common sense) and the person distributing it would be committing a crime. This is exactly the same as online piracy except on a smaller scale. If you wan to own something, buy it, if not then you shouldn't own it.

 

You totally missed my point with the shoes analogy. In our lazy 21st Century, if people can get something for free without moving, they will do it in a heartbeat over having to move and pay for the same thing. This does not meant the thing is not worth paying for, it just means that it is human behaviour to go for the easy option. Let me put it in an even more flamboyant example. If I was offered a free Ferrari on my doorstep, or to go pick it up from 1 mile away for £10, I would go for the free option. This does not mean it would not be worth the £10, as it is worth thousands more, it just means the easy option is what humans gravitate towards. Torrenting music for free over going to a shop and purchasing it is the easy option which people will go for.

[sees_all1]

Piracy is not theft. All the bandwidth in a bit-torrent swarm is supplied by other people sharing that file. Nothing is being stolen not even the bandwidth or CPU cycles required to share the file. Please do not resort to false analogies.

 

Intellectual property is being stolen. The reason "sharing" music online is illegal is the exact same reason you'd be sued if you manufactured your own iPads and gave them away for free. True, nothing physically is being stolen, but you are distributing a license which you have no right to distribute.

 

As an inventor, I like the fact that I can have a monopoly on my idea for 20 years after I teach the world how to make it, and pay the filing fees. Just like writing a patent application, creating music takes time, effort, and capital. You know, money. If you photocopied one of my invention applications and published it in a magazine, you didn't steal the original copy, but you stole from me 20 years of profits I should have had. Whether my invention is crap or not (in your opinion) doesn't matter.

[Alg]

Piracy is not theft. All the bandwidth in a bit-torrent swarm is supplied by other people sharing that file. Nothing is being stolen not even the bandwidth or CPU cycles required to share the file. Please do not resort to false analogies.

 

Sharing is a natural part of our society, and I have yet to encounter a human lacking any generosity at all. If I want to share a movie off my computer then where is the harm, as I am simply reproducing a fresh copy that is then given to another person free of charge. Some day we may have the nano-technology to allow us to make perfect copies of tangible objects as well, and that will truly be a fantastic era for our society.

Again with the theft thing... :wall: I've been told to dig for what you guys are trying to say, I wish you would follow your own advice.

If I was saying piracy was theft, I would have outright said it, now and in the past. I have not said it now nor in the past. The analogy, again, was a response to your assertion that something is only as valuable as people are willing to pay for, which in your little world, means "free". The fact that I've had to explain it twice isn't good for you guys.

 

What you are doing is making a product freely available through downloads to anyone, without the permission of the creator. Furthermore, you insult said creator by saying his or her product is not worth paying for anyway. That isn't sharing, that's full-blown distribution. And you don't see anything wrong with distributing someone's creation without their permission?

 

Sharing is done between one copy. If there was more than one copy involved, the individuals wouldn't need to share, because they would each have their own. To quote you, "Please do not resort to false analogies".

[indy500fan]

Piracy is not theft. All the bandwidth in a bit-torrent swarm is supplied by other people sharing that file. Nothing is being stolen not even the bandwidth or CPU cycles required to share the file. Please do not resort to false analogies.

 

Sharing is a natural part of our society, and I have yet to encounter a human lacking any generosity at all. If I want to share a movie off my computer then where is the harm, as I am simply reproducing a fresh copy that is then given to another person free of charge. Some day we may have the nano-technology to allow us to make perfect copies of tangible objects as well, and that will truly be a fantastic era for our society.

 

I can't wait for some sort of cornucopia technology to exist, for scarcity to not exist and we can finally live in some sort of meritocracy where there is no money, just people doing what they love to do, to the best of their ability.

[DaN]

You totally missed my point with the shoes analogy. In our lazy 21st Century, if people can get something for free without moving, they will do it in a heartbeat over having to move and pay for the same thing. This does not meant the thing is not worth paying for, it just means that it is human behaviour to go for the easy option. Let me put it in an even more flamboyant example. If I was offered a free Ferrari on my doorstep, or to go pick it up from 1 mile away for £10, I would go for the free option. This does not mean it would not be worth the £10, as it is worth thousands more, it just means the easy option is what humans gravitate towards. Torrenting music for free over going to a shop and purchasing it is the easy option which people will go for.

 

People buy music. Piracy does not stop the sales, the idea that people won't pay for something they can get for free is incorrect because I buy music and movies all the time and so do allot of other people.

 

 

Again with the theft thing... :wall: I've been told to dig for what you guys are trying to say, I wish you would follow your own advice.

If I was saying piracy was theft, I would have outright said it, now and in the past. I have not said it now nor in the past. The analogy, again, was a response to your assertion that something is only as valuable as people are willing to pay for, which in your little world, means "free". The fact that I've had to explain it twice isn't good for you guys.

 

 

I have some doubts as to whether you even read my post. Otherwise you would know that I pay for media.

 

A product or service is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it. That is an absolute fact in business and people who ignore it are almost certain to go bust, sadly I see it happen far too often.

[Danqazmlp]

You totally missed my point with the shoes analogy. In our lazy 21st Century, if people can get something for free without moving, they will do it in a heartbeat over having to move and pay for the same thing. This does not meant the thing is not worth paying for, it just means that it is human behaviour to go for the easy option. Let me put it in an even more flamboyant example. If I was offered a free Ferrari on my doorstep, or to go pick it up from 1 mile away for £10, I would go for the free option. This does not mean it would not be worth the £10, as it is worth thousands more, it just means the easy option is what humans gravitate towards. Torrenting music for free over going to a shop and purchasing it is the easy option which people will go for.

 

People buy music. Piracy does not stop the sales, the idea that people won't pay for something they can get for free is incorrect because I buy music and movies all the time and so do allot of other people.

 

 

Again with the theft thing... :wall: I've been told to dig for what you guys are trying to say, I wish you would follow your own advice.

If I was saying piracy was theft, I would have outright said it, now and in the past. I have not said it now nor in the past. The analogy, again, was a response to your assertion that something is only as valuable as people are willing to pay for, which in your little world, means "free". The fact that I've had to explain it twice isn't good for you guys.

 

 

I have some doubts as to whether you even read my post. Otherwise you would know that I pay for media.

 

A product or service is only worth what someone is willing to pay for it. That is an absolute fact in business and people who ignore it are almost certain to go bust, sadly I see it happen far too often.

 

 

The thing is, people are not willing to pay because the product is not as good, but because they can get it for free elsewhere. Without the piracy, the price would not come into question as they haven't exactly changed since pre-internet and piracy. However, because it can be gotten for free, it massively devalues the product. It is piracy making something seem to you that it is not worth it, not those making the product.

 

Also, saying somebody will not buy something they can get to free is incorrect is itself, incorrect. Sorry but you cannot think you are right there? I can guarantee that many people pirate not because they can't afford things, not because they do not think it is worth it, but because it is easier and FREE to pirate. They may think about going down to a shop to buy a CD but then see that they can get it for free in 60 seconds. That person won't go and buy it.

[EarthySun]

I would actually like buying music a lot more if it weren't so ridiculously expensive. You'd think that the solution to getting more people to buy your product would be to lower the price, but no.

[I_am_Geed]

Herd about this when it first started.

 

Same time as when watchmovies also went down(the most recent time lol)

 

 

Meh. Everyone who knows what theyre doing has moved on already.

[EarthySun]

Herd about this when it first started.

 

Same time as when watchmovies also went down(the most recent time lol)

 

 

Meh. Everyone who knows what theyre doing has moved on already.

 

Utorrent, Bittorrent, Pirate Bay. :thumbup:

[Dax]

µTorrent and Demonoid for me.

 

Pirate Bay for those rare occasions I can't find it on Demonoid.

[Shiny]

µTorrent and btjunkie.

 

Bit torrent junkie has a collection of torrents from all those websites - tpb, demonoid etc.

 

Kinda like google.

[Omar]

Limewire shut down? But where will I get my malware-ridden music?

The way I see it, right now, piracy is helping sales because it's free advertising, but as it gets more and more accessible to the technologically impaired, the amount of people who buy will gradually get smaller. On top of that, less people will think of it as theft because all their friends are doing it. Piracy will eventually become a real problem as the percentage of people who buy music gets smaller. It's no surprise the RIAA is trying to tackle this now. They're a little behind schedule though, Limewire is so passé...

[Saru Inc]

I downloaded an album today and Avira said "malware detected" whoops. :)

[Sbrideau]

Limewire shut down? But where will I get my malware-ridden music?

The way I see it, right now, piracy is helping sales because it's free advertising, but as it gets more and more accessible to the technologically impaired, the amount of people who buy will gradually get smaller. On top of that, less people will think of it as theft because all their friends are doing it. Piracy will eventually become a real problem as the percentage of people who buy music gets smaller. It's no surprise the RIAA is trying to tackle this now. They're a little behind schedule though, Limewire is so passé...

 

 

You're a bit behind on that statement. Where I live, not many people even have computers, but those who have and that are completely computer illiterate thinks it's ok to download music and movies.

 

Meh, yesterday was the last time I bought an album before downloading and listening to it first. I bought the latest album by Disturbed, and even if I still think they're a very good band, that album just isn't as good as the others, the songs are too much alike on that one.