Audio & Video Software forum

General discussion

Poll: Do you feel any obligation to buy recorded music?

by Lee Koo (ADMIN) CNET staff/forum admin / March 5, 2013 2:13 AM PST

To give you some perspective to this poll, read this CNET blog: Poll: Should music be free?

Do you feel any obligation to buy recorded music?


-- Yes, I like to support my favorite bands and buy their albums/songs.

-- No, but I go to their concerts and buy their merch.

-- No, bands just use music to promote their shows.

Cast your vote here:
http://forums.cnet.com/2706-21566_102-2111.html

Post a reply
Discussion is locked
You are posting a reply to: Poll: Do you feel any obligation to buy recorded music?
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Please refer to our CNET Forums policies for details. All submitted content is subject to our Terms of Use.
Track this discussion and email me when there are updates

If you're asking for technical help, please be sure to include all your system info, including operating system, model number, and any other specifics related to the problem. Also please exercise your best judgment when posting in the forums--revealing personal information such as your e-mail address, telephone number, and address is not recommended.

You are reporting the following post: Poll: Do you feel any obligation to buy recorded music?
This post has been flagged and will be reviewed by our staff. Thank you for helping us maintain CNET's great community.
Sorry, there was a problem flagging this post. Please try again now or at a later time.
If you believe this post is offensive or violates the CNET Forums' Usage policies, you can report it below (this will not automatically remove the post). Once reported, our moderators will be notified and the post will be reviewed.
Collapse -
Idiocy
by dangnad1 / March 5, 2013 1:25 PM PST

This whole damn subject was beaten to death by everyone including the courts 13 years ago. What's going on, Leo? Have you run out of substantial questions to ask? Most replies to this question are self-righteous a--holes who illegally download music with their right index finger while having left hand held firmly over a bible.

Collapse -
a zillion different ways to deliver your message
by dlynwild1 / March 6, 2013 10:57 AM PST
In reply to: Idiocy

I do respect your right to an opinion, but I'm really offended by your judgemental, condescending tone and nasty remarks toward our Community Manager. (His name is Lee, BTW)

Alot has changed during the last 13 years, and this is an ethical subject that deserves ongoing discussion.
Please take your nasty attitude elsewhere.

Respectfully,
a fellow community member

Collapse -
How many of us expect to work for nothing?
by msecour / March 5, 2013 1:51 PM PST

It boggles the mind that some people think that recording artists and producers should be working without receiving compensation for their work.

Collapse -
Liberate the world and make everything free
by Spoiled-silly / March 5, 2013 2:45 PM PST

I think candy and cars and new shoes and stuff should always be free. Minor shoplifting is a well-known thing and stores include it in their budgets. I mean, if you find a way to get it for nothing, then the system is not really trying to stop you,meaning they don't really care about you taking it for free, right?
Look, if you are smart enough to track it down for free, why be stuupid and pay for it?

On, now, seriously---of course the above remarks are insane.
Musicians may be artists, they may be Bohemian, they may be against the mainstream culture 9or not---ask opera singers that), byt they have a job, and they are working, and they have to live. They can't just live on the props you give them by shaking to their tunes free of charge. Look for the best price, the best bargain, but do pay for it.
I was relieved to see over 60% so far agree with this point of view, but it means the other 35+% or so are children up too late at night playing with their computers.

Another reader pointed out this seemed a desperate question and I sort of agreed at first, but the fact that the result is not 80% against stealing music is enough to make me wonder if it is worth discussing again.

Collapse -
A rose by any other name is a rose
by Earl H / March 5, 2013 7:58 PM PST

Anybody who downloads music for free when they should be paying for it is a thief. Definition of a thief is one who steals, especially by stealth. I'm not referring to downloads that are offered for free but ones which require compensation for permission to do so. These artists are entitled to make a living for their work and creativity. As an individual, you have the choice to purchase or not. As for the posting by dangnad1 titled "Idiocy", by the sound of it, it could possibly be beneficial for you to read the bible.

Collapse -
Can't vote
by txlevi / March 5, 2013 8:15 PM PST

I don't understand why CNET cannot keep their voting page working. You land there and nothing is in the right pane except a link to comment on voting.

Is this a tech firm? Do we rely on them for views on technology? Can they keep their system working - NO!

Collapse -
Sorry to hear this...
by Lee Koo (ADMIN) CNET staff/forum admin / March 6, 2013 3:12 AM PST
In reply to: Can't vote

Please see my reply below to txlevi.

And let me know what browser you are using.

Thanks!
-Lee

Collapse -
Can't vote
by txlevi / March 5, 2013 8:18 PM PST

Voting is not working, again. When will CNet get their act together?

Collapse -
Can't vote
by Palebushman / March 5, 2013 9:20 PM PST
In reply to: Can't vote

Before you start complaining about why the voting pane is not appearing in your browser, would you be so kind as to check any filters/plug-ins you might have enabled first! Check in particular, why your browser prevents 'CBS Interactive' from working.
And as for taking a swipe at our Community Manager, that's sad and is well out of order. 13 years ago, many of our current 'forumites' where not on here to express their views.
BTW, the entire Cnet Team, are a fantastic bunch in what they do for us, and amazingly.......
It's all FREE too.
Personally, I would rather pay for my entertainment, it makes my expensive reproduction devices work at their full potential. Happy

Collapse -
Sorry for the issue you are experiencing...
by Lee Koo (ADMIN) CNET staff/forum admin / March 6, 2013 3:11 AM PST
In reply to: Can't vote

Can you tell me what browser you are using? Do have ad blockers or any browser add on that you think may affect the voting system? Are you allowing cookies?

I've checked using Chrome Version 25.0.1364.152 m, FF19, IE 9.0.8.. and they all display the poll just fine.

Please let me know so I can investigate and I do apologize for inconvenience.

Thanks!
-Lee

Collapse -
Not Completely Free
by The_Bluesman / March 5, 2013 9:24 PM PST

As a songwriter/musician I am not motivated by money in the creative process, but I don't feel I should give it away. If there is substantial income from the use of the music, such as in film or TV or by another artist, then I cold see where the general public could have the music for free.

Collapse -
Absolutely
by itsdigger / March 5, 2013 9:40 PM PST

they should be compensated for their work. I was always paid for mine. Why would musicians be any different than a carpenter or bulldozer operator or anyone else ?

Collapse -
Shades of grey
by ErikHockman / March 5, 2013 11:01 PM PST

The question is not cut and dry.

The Sony-Columbias-BMG's of the world follow human nature in wanting to get as much as they can for as little effort as they have to put forth. As a result, typically, only the material which they feel has the greatest popularity is made commercially available. You're not going to find the solo version of Linda McCartney singing "Hey Jude" on itunes, or any commercially released record or CD. Yet the major music corporations will cherry pick, and make examples of anyone they catch file-sharing this tune, or others which they claim to have a copyright to, but can't be bothered to release. The corporations claim that it is not excessive greed behind such lawsuits, but a desire to protect the interests of the recording artists. These would be the same recording artists who by most contracts are forbidden to dictate which of their songs will be recorded, how the material is presented, and how it is produced. These recording artists would include such luminaries as Joseph Byrd, whose 1967 recording, "The United States of America" is listed in music history books as the first productive use of synthesizers in contemporary music. Joe had this to say about the material being re-released on the Sundazed label: "I had less than 1% input into the Sundazed re-release, and that's more than I'm getting in royalties! They did email me, and asked if I'd be interested in doing notes. I asked for $300 and got it. Sundazed took out all references they found controversial, including one about Bill Graham."
I'm sure it an accident that caused Leonard Nimoy to sue Paramount after finding they'd been marketing his image to various companies, such as Heineken, for many years - but somehow forgot to pay him any royalties for it. The case was strung out for a long time, until they wanted him to appear in a Star Trek movie, but he refused to read the script until the lawsuit was resolved and he got paid.
Per the "Washington Post" 5/5/2009, "The May 29 front-page story "For R&B Star, Day Job's the Real High Note" provided a fascinating look into the life of Herb Feemster, the local musician whose hit songs "Reunited" and "Shake Your Groove Thing" helped propel his duo, Peaches and Herb, to international fame. Mr. Feemster had to sue his record label to recoup unpaid royalties. He is merely the latest in a long line of recording artists who have filed lawsuits against their record labels after allegedly being cheated out of royalties. Indeed, the record labels' systematic exploitation of prominent musicians -- from Prince to Poison to the estates of Count Basie and Benny Goodman -- has been well-documented."
So, should recording artists be paid for their work? Of course. Can you count on the vast majority of the music industry to give proper recompense from monies received? No. Their motivation is greed. Their modus operandi pushing formulaic garbage, and the concept of talent would only get in the way in the planning of their marketing divisions.
The same choking off of talent in the name of "greatest return on dollar" is evidenced in DVD releases. Will the world ever see the most requested title of the 60's "Batman" series released? If so, will it be doctored like the horrible cut and paste job of "WKRP - Season 1", where the spliced out nearly all of the real music heard in the series, and replaced it with generic rubbish which demanded no royalties? It's been 3 years since season 3 was released, will "Beverly Hillbillies - Season 4" ever see the light of day? It's been 12 years since "Green Acres - Season 3" was released. Hey MGM, where's season 4?
In essence, it seems like the greed of the "entertainment industry" is forcing people to do things like file share to get things they aren't willing to provide. And when that happens, the industry cries "foul" and starts suing, instead of seeing the cause of the problem in the mirror.

Collapse -
You're not being magnanimous, you're being legal
by helsharmar / March 6, 2013 4:16 AM PST

If the music I want to hear is legally available only by paying for it, I will decide whether I want to either pay for it or not listen to it. Decisions to acquire it by circumventing payment are unethical and likely illegal. Just because you CAN get it for free doesn't make it ok, any more than it's ok to take your iPad from your car because you left the door open and the iPad visible to passersby. Why is that so hard to understand?

And to the person who thinks copyright is a "reward"--um, no, it's legal protection.

Collapse -
Noooo....But, I do purchase cd's etc.
by celticgoddess / March 6, 2013 5:02 AM PST

As I am a retired granny, I do purchase cd's of music...however, they are mostly USED, & I get them from the various websites out there. I do not pay the original price for a cd, & have had mainly no problems with the performance of music. Only one of LOTS had a problem on one track, where it did not play properly. When told seller, they refunded my money. I still have that CD, but eventually will pass it on to Goodwill. I feel that I am helping the original buyer & then getting a discount myself.

Collapse -
But, I do purchase cd's etc.
by mal_aus / March 7, 2013 3:42 PM PST

I have listened to lots of music which I wouldn't have bothered with if I had to buy it. Having said that I am happy to pay for the music I have heard and liked BUT how would it be if the artist to get the money and not the rip off distribution network. If the artist were getting their just reward the music would be so much cheaper and not worth the trouble of pirating. The same applies to books and the distributors are losing that battle.
CD's priced at a dollar or so is what I'm talking about. DVD's about the same.

Collapse -
Try before you buy....
by casaraku / March 6, 2013 9:22 AM PST

Maybe they should have an expiry date like trialware.... so if you really like a song you can buy it.... many people i know have a few thousand songs on their player but few can name a song or band they like...or listen to all the time. For most of them it is like the housewives who have the radio and/or TV all day long... just background noise to keep them company.... listening to this background noise while doing homework... and hum along if they recognize a tune....Yes it is also advertising for their concerts....
I listen to a lot of music via friends, internet, and radio. Little catches my attention to turn up the volume and I rarely buy songs....

Collapse -
But...
by Crash2100 / March 6, 2013 11:12 AM PST

What companies can't seem realize is that they need to stop basically scamming their customers. Also, how does copy protection literally do anything if they let the people burn the stuff onto a CD? Another thing I don't understand about this whole music war, is that recording off of radio and TV is nearly the same thing. So, why is that stuff legal without too many people arguing about the whole situation. Are they really making something copy protected, or are they simply trying to force people to use a specific brand of media players?

Popular Forums
icon
Computer Help 49,613 discussions
icon
Computer Newbies 10,349 discussions
icon
Laptops 19,436 discussions
icon
Security 30,426 discussions
icon
TVs & Home Theaters 20,308 discussions
icon
Windows 10 360 discussions
icon
Phones 15,802 discussions
icon
Windows 7 7,351 discussions
icon
Networking & Wireless 14,641 discussions

CNET's Tech Minute

Top 3 news reading apps

With the latest tech, getting news delivered to your phone is easier than ever. Here's a roundup of apps that are customizable and useful for getting the news.