Commodore Remix

Hi everyone... I've been thinking about some things lately... some things inspired by topics in here, and others out of own moral etc.

Now before I start this topic, please understand that I'm not really taking any sides as I see pros and cons with both.... PLEASE!

I'm just curious what has happened to morale in later times... I see several topics with furious responeses when someone take bits from C64 tunes and use them in commercial projects or cases where people use pirated music software, and of course I can understand that it's bad to make money out of other peoples work.... but... then I think back on the scene... back to the 80's... how many of us did not do illegal copying of games?... but today it seems like everything has turned 180 degrees! ... why?

What is it that make everyone so god damned holy these days?... has moral really changed? ... I mean, back then you would almost be looked upon with frown if someone raised their arm in the name of copyright!? ... you were almost an outsider if you got your software legaly! (the term "LAMER" springs to mind)... many of these scene people I guess are now making remixes in here (like me), but what happened?

Is it because many of you now make money from music and thus suddenly can use copyright for your own gain? ...

I have to add that it's not just in here, I've witnessed this "moral" thing in other music and software forums... it's this aura of "I'm Clean!... I use only original software cause that's the right way to go!"... funny how things have changed eh?

I'm just thinking: I wonder how many of those moral persons that actually do use pirated software anyway to some extend, but just do not admit to it... is there a lot of double morality out there?

I'd relly like a constructive debate on this topic, not a topic about what's right and wrong because I'm sure there are different oppinions on that. I'd rather like to know WHY things have changed, if anyone knows something I don't... becuase I myself don't think it's changed... people just tend to be wearing "moral's mask" if you ask me...

Sometimes I DO feel tempted at using some samples that I'm not really allowed to, and actually find it frustrating to have to think in moral terms.... I have a hard time seing where inspiration turns into copyright infringement... and it seems that the border moves according to how much money the "violated" musician has to spend... this I personally find very wrong, but it's obviosly next to impossible to give a straight answer to it..

Personaly if feel both sides have good standpoints to their moral, and really have a hard time deciding what's right and wrong... but one thing I cannot stand is when people preach the laws of moral, but do things themselves in the dark. Now I'm not thinking of anyone particular, but the knowledge I have of how the scene was back then it's hard to believe that they should have become "clean", but if... then why? do we get "wiser" with age?

Now I cannot figure out how to make a poll, but it would certainly be interresting to see an anonymous poll on who use pirated or copyrighted stuff in here ... problem may be; will everyone be honest?

Things which have always been wrong, even in the scene days:

1) Claiming credit for other people's work
2) Making money off other people's work without sharing it appropriately.

Most sample clearance problems breach both these rules, and so are wrong, as well as illegal.

Also, it's my job (contractually) to try and make sure my clients (C64 composers) aren't ripped off, and to judge whether it's worth pursuing particular people. So it's not a question of me setting myself as "whiter than white", it's a question of me doing the job I set out to do (which happens to benefit deserving composers).

Chris

Chris: I'm with you on those two points (though I asked not to discuss what was right or wrong, but what has made people turn 180 degrees today)... I'm not interrested in discussing what's right or wrong.

What I wonder is still, why people from the 80's C64 and AMIGA scene, who almost had pride in huge copy-parties, ripping music off games etc. (swappers of many groups had almost god status!!!) today MAY have changed to the side of the "law"? ... Even the composers of many games music did unaruthorized covers!!! it just give me a strange feel in my stomach to see, that Whittaker for an example, pull money out of Kernkraft, when he himself has covered for example Nena's 99 Luftballons!?!?... Am I the only one here, who can see the double morallity?

Did one just wake up one day when you got older and thought "AAAAARGH! WHAT HAVE I DONE!!!!! ... I SHALL NEVER AGAIN!...."

Or is it more likely that nothing has changed, and that it's just the "public face" after the internet came, that is the answer? ... I don't know, that is why I wanted to hear others view on it... but nonetheless, piracy is STILL a big deal out there... so something tells me that we're dealing with a TABOO

One feeling I've got by reading numerous topics on the internet about Piracy and copyright, even though it's ilegal is, that most copyright holders, and peoples opinion in general is, that if you DON'T make money of it "we don't really bother".... hmmm... this seems to indicate, that many people have no problem with laws beeing breached as long as money is not involved... personaly I have just this oppinion actually (with a few exeptions)... (I'm talking mainly music software and sample usage here!!!)

I hear you Razmo, and I also hear Chris, which has chosen his to points carefully and they are indeed crystal clear. The Timbaland case, although it *might* have been ignorance on his part, cannot be defended, he makes money off art which he in reality hasn't created himself. The "casual" pirate doesn't make money. -- Of course you could say that he's making money but negation - he isn't spending what he'd otherwise spend; unless he couldn't, in which case, no loss.

I want to see the music industry move towards a subscription model where you subscribe to get access to a large pool of music instead of having to buy an album at a time.

Both models can coexist, but the subscription model, or the "tax model", if you will, will allow people to get access to much more music. It doesn't have to cost artists anything, it'll mean people can take more chances and listen to more music, since the subscription has already been paid.

It's the world zero-cost replication and Internet transport is utlilized. The downside is potentially the DRM and limited hardware support.

I call it the "tax model" because it's like the library, kind of: everyone pay the taxes that support it, but there is no limit to the number of books you can lend. Of course in the digital realm, there is no need to impose lending restrictions, unless you "stop paying your tax".

But the best model for everyone concerned, I don't know. We'll see what the future will bring - not that the future will necessarily bring good things for everyone.

The tax model is a problem for niche players in the long tail of the music industry: such as, for instance, C64 record labels. You'd be lucky to get a fraction of the money you'd need to keep commercially viable if you relied on that.

Chris

Just a thought.

Could those who now take the Legit path have more to lose compared to when they were younger?

Back in the Scene days when everyone was 13-17 years old etc... if they were caught doing illegal activity what did they have to lose?

Same people now in their 30's and 40's have a Home, Wife, Kids alot more to lose than before??

Just a thought.

So we should consider the scene's past to be because of being made of young people, who just wanted to have fun, and did not really care?... maybe there is something rigth about it now that I think about it.

The funny part though is, that nowadays something that was once almost a "cool way of living" for many a scene member, has now suddenly turned into the direct opposite!...

Could another reason be, that the majority of those from the scene back then, when computers were mere "toys", have now realized how much money computers can actually make? ... could it be, that those people from the scene are now in computer software companies as programmers, musicians and graphical artists and them selves suddenly "see" that piracy hits on the wallet of those companies?

Is it maybe because of the old reason that you have to "feel the pain, to understand the pain"?

And once again, the topic is "flavoured" with what is right and what is wrong, whhich I somehow tried to avoid... but I guess that it is hard to restrain from that

Personally I have sort of a "robin 'ood" kind of view on this copyright issue... If you do not use pirated software to earn money on others work, I find it reasonable that one use it... especialy if you do normaly not have the funds to purchase the software in the first place.... I feel that as long as you do not "threaten" others income of their work, then I see no harm done.

With music software you get software that was not meant to please (like games), but has been made to create things... actually I could myself easily (if I actually used software) use pirated software and sample CDs for work .... as long as I earn nothing on it... I harm noone by doing it... I would actually use it for earning money also if I wanted to, until I get an income from using it... THEN I would pay for what I used in my work... this would allow poorer people the ability to get at shot at earning, otherwise not having the tools....

But I also feel, that taking something from another artist, and putting it into another context that will not harm direct sales of the copyright holder should be tolerated.... if money is the big deal, and the original work is not selling less because of the "stolen" material, then why bother?... pride?... yeah... think so.... example: Bittersweet Symphony.... Yes, it was a piece of music, but I hardly think they took more than a short hook from Stones... Did Stone's sales on their original fall in income?... hardly not....

Sometimes I just feel that copyright holders are a bit too proud and arrogant.... seems they sue people just because they can and the amusement of it.

Timbaland? ... I agree with you on that one... but mostly out of moral concerning his arrogance...

Actually I think it would be best, if people just ASKED if they could use a riff from someone else.... but it seems that when that happens, money take the picture again... has anyone ever been allowed to use a sample without the owner wanting payment?... I don't think so.... it's like...

...yeah... the society we have in the 21st centure is just so capitallistic... makes me feel sick!

When will copyright owner start seeing a few sample CD's or the like as advertisement.... *SIGH!* ... it's just so .... argh!

Just by reading the danish KODA magazine (musicians union and collector of royalties in Denmark) makes me sick!... 75% of the magazine is whining about MP3 piracy and how many stupid things the government has voted against the music industry and bla bla bla...

Where has the fun of making music gone?

I'm just thinking: HOW many people in this world want to use pirated software if we new the number?... I'm sure that if all were to be prosecuted for having used pirated software, software piracy wopuld be the number one crime in the world! ... actually I think, that it wopuld be so many people wanting to use it, that it would be questionable if peoples definition on what is right or wrong regarding copyright and piracy would become rather blurred because of the vast amount of people for and against! ... I think it would look something like when alcohol was forbidden in amerika... people generally wants it, but it's just ilegal...

When will it dawn on teh music industry, that maybe it's time to change the illusion? ... some has seen the light... some DO put they music out for free on the net, and try making money from live events, and I know the music industry IS keeping an eye out for that option now.... maybe the light HAS begun to shine through to them as well, and realised that it's unstoppable...

We need a copyright law revolution...

yep!

now I'm in for it?

Or even better: If the price of music were lowered to a level, where people prefer to buy rather than pirate... then we would get somewhere... but as with all things costing money in this world we live in, things just get more and more expensive... it's NEVER the other way around... when did YOU last see your rent get lowered? ... yeah! got you!

I think some of it is because back then we were all a lot younger than we are now. When I had the Amiga and got involved in the scene I was around between 15 and 19. I'm now 33 and not much has changed except I am paying for a hell of a lot more software than I did back then.

Why? Because I have my own money and because I've grown up and able to fully comprehend "theft" of someone else's work. My brothers, sisters and friends have also grown up and from what they do I know how much it'd hit and upset them to have any of their work stolen.

Years ago a large part was wanting to "fit in" and giving in to "peer pressure" to have pirated this and that. As already mentioned, admitting back then to buying stuff could have made you an outsider, a lamer or whatever you want to call them.

Even now the only person I know who has a completely 100% legit machine is my mother. She bought her Mac and she bought Final Cut Pro and every other piece of software. Her excuse is paranoia because of Apple's automatic updates - the whole "it's connecting to Apple" that worries her. That and she's not happy with using pirated software.

If I was still in my teens now I would have used as much pirated software as possible. Now items I've bought include Nero, VideoStudio, Windows XP and some games.

I think there's also the element that because we're more adult and aware of "theft" things are now starting to be noticed. Especially with the available of the internet as it is now we're able to communicate that much quicker with more people in such a short time.

With the community that much closer now than it was back then we've also got the "it's happened to one of our own".

Thanks for reading, that's my two cents worth

One thing I've never understood regarding software piracy is, why it is considered to be THEFT? ... If you steal something from someone, he no longer has it right?... when you pirate you make a copy... the original is still where it always was right? ....

Now I'll be told that the theft is in the fact that you steal the option of the maker of the original to make money on that copy.... true, but were there really an option for that in the first place? ... sometimes yes, and sometimes no... so in some cases there was nothing to gain by preventing the "theft", and it is those cases I personaly do not see the harm done, and the possibility for poor people to get a chance too...

The moral ought to be with those who HAVE the money to pay for it, that do not....

THat's as far as my Robin Hood mind goes

Because you're taking away the money that the creator(s) would have had in their pocket if you had bought it although I do understand what you mean.

That's why I enclose theft in quotes!

Lets take an example:

I decide to sell all of my harwdare and go totaly software... I've decided to drop all idears of earning money from my music composition, and I decide to download hoards of pirated software softsynths and sample CDs...

I decide that this is just my hobby... no money of it, and I want to make my music freely available on the internet on my homepage for everyone to download and enjoy.... I decide, that since I earn nothing on it, I'm not going to buy the software... I'll use the pirated instead...

On my homepage I decide to explain how my music was made... I would write what sample CDs I used, and what software I used...

If I wanted to, I could buy the software... or at least some of it, but decide, that since it's just a non-profit thing, I'd just spend the money on my family instead.... I'm not harming anyone really...


How would you guys look at me, if that was the case?