Craig is right, when it comes to copying an entire CD or even a big chunk of it. That is certainly taking someone's income away. And I'd say that's a perfect place to draw the line, when you're generating copies of someone's entire album that is inprint and readily available. But if I put one or two John Zorn cuts on the CD that I'm making for a buddy who doesn't know about Zorn's work (and where's he gonna start with that catalogue?), then I've what I've done is less to give him product than to have given him consumer information. It not even a question of "will he shell out the money?" at that point, but rather "is he aware that this product exists and is available?" Also, in many cases, I know the tastes of my friends well enough to know what of Zorn's is most likely to elicit a favorable response. I don't think this is crap, because my friends and I have exposed each other for years to music via making compilation tapes (and now discs) for each other. And our respective record collections have been dramtically affected by that. When I was a young jazz player, how many people made me tapes of their favorite stuff hoping I would catch the bug? it worked, too. I would not have known about Denny Zeitlin or a lot of other folks had enterprising people not made me copies of the stuff. And I did a LOT of record buying based on those compilations, and so have a great many of my friends. Still do, too. The record companies have totally made speculative purchase impractical. If some of us want to do something about the problem by recording a cut or two off an album because we think we have a friend who will hear that and want the album enough to buy it, it's a helluva lot better than sitting around and bellyaching about how nobody can afford to check out new music. sh on 11/30/02 2:34 PM, Craig Rath at fripp@attbi.com wrote:
Please tell me why, if someone copies and keeps one of our releases, thereby depriving me of the sale of that release and our artist for the payment of the sale of that release, why this *isn't* theft?
The sense I'm getting from some people here is that they don't consider it stealing because you would never have made that sale in the first place - they wouldn't have shelled out the money anyway, so you can't lose what you would never have gotten in the first place. I happen to think this argument is crap. If you aren't willing to invest your money in purchasing the disc, what gives you the right to enjoy the disc? I would love to have a new car, but I won't get one because I can't afford one. But I really want it anyway, so just taking one isn't wrong because I would never have bought it in the first place, right? I realize there is a difference in scope here, but where do you draw the line? The only real difference I see is that I can't easily make a copy of a car whereas copying CDs has become ridiculously easy.
The other prevailing argument seems to be that copying music and giving it to others helps the bands by spreading the word to an audience that otherwise wouldn't have been exposed to it. Again, crap. What about loaning your legitimately purchased copy to someone else for a week to let them make up their mind about it? If they like it, they can buy a copy and you get yours back. If not, you get yours back and there isn't an unplayed illegitimate copy laying around somewhere. Why is this not preferable to just giving them a free copy of a disc? Are you trying to expand someone else's taste in music, or just their record collection?
Just because it is easy to do something today with the technology being what it is doesn't make it right. I was going to say that you don't see people making copies of books because it isn't cost effective to do so, but I guess billashline@netscape.net proved me wrong. Then again, his example assumes that a few bucks is better than full price, when you can get books at greatly discounted prices every day legitimately, and without the hassles of printing your own copy. I can guarantee that as soon as it is cost effective to copy DVDs, there will be people doing so and justifying it one way or another.
I am in no way guilt free here - I've downloaded things because it was easier as well. But at least I admit that what I did was wrong. I'm not trying to justify it by coming up with excuses. And about 90% of the stuff I've downloaded in the past was music that was unavailable to me in any other way. If I find one of these releases available legitimately, I buy it and throw out the CDR.
I'm not trying to be preachy - do whatever you want, it's your life. But don't make excuses for your actions or blame your actions on the "evil record companies". It's wrong, and that's all there is to it. If that doesn't bother you, all the power to you.
Craig M. Rath H: fripp@attbi.com W: rathc@questarweb.com
_______________________________________________ zorn-list mailing list zorn-list@mailman.xmission.com To UNSUBSCRIBE or Change Your Subscription Options, go to the webpage below http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/zorn-list