Downloading Flying Music?

[Jay Honeck]

We've got the PS Engineering CD/Intercom in our plane, and listen to CDs on
long trips.

I am obviously slipping into "dinosaur" status, as I have never downloaded
music, for "burning" onto a blank CD. I *have* burned CDs, but I've always
done it from tracks played off of another CD.

Does anyone here download (and then burn) CDs for listening while in flight?
Any recommended sites? Tips? Are these things still free, or did all the
freebies get sued out of existence? Thanks!

BTW: We've got FOUR new additions to the Rec.Aviation Rogue's Gallery!
They are:

- The famous (infamous?) Badwater Bill Phillips, and the zillion planes he's
flown...
- Ross Richardson and his super 180 hp 172!
- CJ Campbell, world-famous flight instructor, and his fabulous 206!
- Bryan Chaisone, and his cool Robinson R-22 helicopter...

See all these guys at http://www.alexisparkinn.com/rec_aviation.htm .
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[sean trost]

Jay,
have you considered using an IPOD type device ? basically an mp3 player
married to a portable hard drive and holds very large amount of music.
and can be plumbed into the intercom.

as for downloading music. I used to be partial to Kazaa lite. but am
leaning towards napster again or Itunes. As these sites actually
support the music biz. and 99 cents per song aint bad.
all the best
Sean Trost


Jay Honeck wrote:
> We've got the PS Engineering CD/Intercom in our plane, and listen to CDs on
> long trips.
>
> I am obviously slipping into "dinosaur" status, as I have never downloaded
> music, for "burning" onto a blank CD. I *have* burned CDs, but I've always
> done it from tracks played off of another CD.
>
> Does anyone here download (and then burn) CDs for listening while in flight?
> Any recommended sites? Tips? Are these things still free, or did all the
> freebies get sued out of existence? Thanks!
>
> BTW: We've got FOUR new additions to the Rec.Aviation Rogue's Gallery!
> They are:
>
> - The famous (infamous?) Badwater Bill Phillips, and the zillion planes he's
> flown...
> - Ross Richardson and his super 180 hp 172!
> - CJ Campbell, world-famous flight instructor, and his fabulous 206!
> - Bryan Chaisone, and his cool Robinson R-22 helicopter...
>
> See all these guys at http://www.alexisparkinn.com/rec_aviation.htm .

[Frank Stutzman]

sean trost > wrote:
> have you considered using an IPOD type device ? basically an mp3 player
> married to a portable hard drive and holds very large amount of music.
> and can be plumbed into the intercom.

One of the guys on one of the Bonanza lists complained that his Ipod
skipped at altitude. One of the other guys happened to be a hard disk
engineer and explained that this would probably be expected at high
(greater than about 10,000 feet) altitudes. The disk heads float on a
cushion of air. At high altitude there isn't enough air density to keep
the heads floating reliably.

No personal knowledge of this, just repeating what I heard.

--
Frank Stutzman
Bonanza N494B "Hula Girl"
Hood River, OR

[nafod40]

Jay Honeck wrote:
> We've got the PS Engineering CD/Intercom in our plane, and listen to CDs on
> long trips.
>
> I am obviously slipping into "dinosaur" status, as I have never downloaded
> music, for "burning" onto a blank CD. I *have* burned CDs, but I've always
> done it from tracks played off of another CD.
>
> Does anyone here download (and then burn) CDs for listening while in flight?
> Any recommended sites? Tips? Are these things still free, or did all the
> freebies get sued out of existence? Thanks!

There are still freebies out there, if you know where to look. It's all
peer-to-peer, so everyone can share music with each other. Go to
http://www.kazaa.com for example. Don't you know a teenager? Ask'em,
they'll know what to do.

Buy a CD player that plays MP3s and regular music CDs. A single disc
with music stored in MP3 format can easily store 10 albums of music.
Amazing. There's a minor decrease in quality (depends on what bit rate
you sample the MP3 at), but your hearing's probably going bad as fast as
your prostate anyway, and you won't notice the diff.

[Jay Honeck]

> Buy a CD player that plays MP3s and regular music CDs. A single disc
> with music stored in MP3 format can easily store 10 albums of music.
> Amazing. There's a minor decrease in quality (depends on what bit rate
> you sample the MP3 at), but your hearing's probably going bad as fast as
> your prostate anyway, and you won't notice the diff.

Unfortunately, the CD player is built-in to the panel, and is only a couple
of years old -- so I'm not looking to replace it.

Any recommendations on software that will convert MP3 files to something
that is playable on a "regular" CD player?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[nafod40]

Jay Honeck wrote:
>>Buy a CD player that plays MP3s and regular music CDs. A single disc
>>with music stored in MP3 format can easily store 10 albums of music.
>>Amazing. There's a minor decrease in quality (depends on what bit rate
>>you sample the MP3 at), but your hearing's probably going bad as fast as
>>your prostate anyway, and you won't notice the diff.
>
> Unfortunately, the CD player is built-in to the panel, and is only a couple
> of years old -- so I'm not looking to replace it.

Too bad. It is a nice capability. But no biggie...

> Any recommendations on software that will convert MP3 files to something
> that is playable on a "regular" CD player?

If your computer has a read/write CD burner, it most probably came with
the CD Create software that all the companies bundle. You can also find
lots of software by googling "CD Burner". Toss in "Freeware" to see
what's out there that is free. The winamp app is good stuff, try
http://www.winamp.com/

It is only $15 for the full app, and it's not Microsoft.

[Morgans]

"sean trost" > wrote in message
om...
> Jay,
> have you considered using an IPOD type device ? basically an mp3 player
> married to a portable hard drive and holds very large amount of music.
> and can be plumbed into the intercom.
>
> as for downloading music. I used to be partial to Kazaa lite. but am
> leaning towards napster again or Itunes. As these sites actually
> support the music biz. and 99 cents per song aint bad.
> all the best
> Sean Trost

A buck per song is not bad? Are you nuts? That is as much or more than you
would pay for a factory made cd, even more, when you consider the cost of
the blank data disk.

The only fair thing to do is rip off the music industry as bad as you can,
for overcharging us for music all these years.
--
Jim in NC

[ET]

nafod40 > wrote in
:

> Jay Honeck wrote:
>> We've got the PS Engineering CD/Intercom in our plane, and listen to
>> CDs on long trips.
>>
>> I am obviously slipping into "dinosaur" status, as I have never
>> downloaded music, for "burning" onto a blank CD. I *have* burned
>> CDs, but I've always done it from tracks played off of another CD.
>>
>> Does anyone here download (and then burn) CDs for listening while in
>> flight? Any recommended sites? Tips? Are these things still free,
>> or did all the freebies get sued out of existence? Thanks!
>
> There are still freebies out there, if you know where to look. It's
> all peer-to-peer, so everyone can share music with each other. Go to
> http://www.kazaa.com for example. Don't you know a teenager? Ask'em,
> they'll know what to do.
>
> Buy a CD player that plays MP3s and regular music CDs. A single disc
> with music stored in MP3 format can easily store 10 albums of music.
> Amazing. There's a minor decrease in quality (depends on what bit rate
> you sample the MP3 at), but your hearing's probably going bad as fast
> as your prostate anyway, and you won't notice the diff.
>

Don't use Kazzaa,,,, they install spyware/adware on your system...

--
ET >:)


"A common mistake people make when trying to design something
completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete
fools."---- Douglas Adams

[DBlumel]

> A buck per song is not bad? Are you nuts? That is as much or more than you
>would pay for a factory made cd, even more, when you consider the cost of
>the blank data disk.
>
>The only fair thing to do is rip off the music industry as bad as you can,
>for overcharging us for music all these years.
>--
>Jim in NC

Sorry Jim, we live in a free market economy. If you don't want to buy because
the price is too high in your estimation, that's your choice. But you cannot
justify stealing because you think they charge too much. I suppose you would
only mark your products up 10% before selling, If you had anything someone else
would want. So if you don't like a price in the store I guess you would steal
that also. Or if you though they charged you too much last time you can steal
it this time. With irrational thinking like that its no wonder our country is
going to hell in a hand basket.

[Jay Honeck]

> >The only fair thing to do is rip off the music industry as bad as you
can,
> >for overcharging us for music all these years.

No, the only fair thing to do is to use your dollars wisely, and purchase
the best quality stuff for the lowest price available.

Stealing the music is theft, and -- no matter the sins of the music industry
in the past (which I could dispute, but that's another post) -- I can't
condone it.

That said, I agree that a buck a song is outrageously high for a download.
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"
"DBlumel" > wrote in message
...
> > A buck per song is not bad? Are you nuts? That is as much or more than
you
> >would pay for a factory made cd, even more, when you consider the cost of
> >the blank data disk.
> >
> >--
> >Jim in NC
>
> Sorry Jim, we live in a free market economy. If you don't want to buy
because
> the price is too high in your estimation, that's your choice. But you
cannot
> justify stealing because you think they charge too much. I suppose you
would
> only mark your products up 10% before selling, If you had anything someone
else
> would want. So if you don't like a price in the store I guess you would
steal
> that also. Or if you though they charged you too much last time you can
steal
> it this time. With irrational thinking like that its no wonder our country
is
> going to hell in a hand basket.

[CW9371]

>Unfortunately, the CD player is built-in to the panel, and is only a couple
>of years old -- so I'm not looking to replace it.
>
>Any recommendations on software that will convert MP3 files to something
>that is playable on a "regular" CD player?
>--


All you have to do is burn it as a audio cd using nero or roxio burners. No
problem its an auto feature built into the program.

Chris

[CW9371]

>Don't use Kazzaa,,,, they install spyware/adware on your system...
>

Only kazzaa does, not kazalite. However use a firewall it keeps the spyware
from dialing out

chrs

[CW9371]

>
>Don't use Kazzaa,,,, they install spyware/adware on your system...
>

There is also bittorrent, but there u have to have some knowledge of computers.
Good for full albums. Emule and edonky work. Napster if u wanna pay, I tunes
and a few others for paying. If u decide to keep something u should buy it
however

[RU ok]

"Morgans" > wrote:


> A buck per song is not bad? Are you nuts? That is as much or more than you
>would pay for a factory made cd, even more, when you consider the cost of
>the blank data disk.
>
>The only fair thing to do is rip off the music industry as bad as you can,
>for overcharging us for music all these years.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

A buck a song under these conditions is certainly an outrage.
Fifty cents would still be internet highway robbery.

However, since when did two wrongs make a right?


Barnyard BOb -
Curmudgeon with a conscience....
or just the devil's advocate?

[Morgans]

"RU ok" > wrote>
> A buck a song under these conditions is certainly an outrage.
> Fifty cents would still be internet highway robbery.
>
> However, since when did two wrongs make a right?
>
>
> Barnyard BOb -
>
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
<g> I've got to admit to throwing this out, after I saw all of the kaazaa
and other suggestions. I do not use these services, but wanted to see the
reaction. It was about as I expected.

When someone gets a download fee of 2 or 3 bucks per record (ouch, my age is
showing), or a quarter per song, then I will consider using them. Until
then, the radio will have to do.
--
Jim in NC

[Doug]

I hate to break it to you , but downloading music is 'not' stealing ,
regardless of what spin they put on it. No one has ever been charged with
theft by the RIAA. What it is , is copyright infringement, and that is what
people 'are' being charged with.

Doug


"DBlumel" wrote > >

> Sorry Jim, we live in a free market economy. If you don't want to buy
because
> the price is too high in your estimation, that's your choice. But you
cannot
> justify stealing because you think they charge too much. I suppose you
would
> only mark your products up 10% before selling, If you had anything someone
else
> would want. So if you don't like a price in the store I guess you would
steal
> that also. Or if you though they charged you too much last time you can
steal
> it this time. With irrational thinking like that its no wonder our country
is
> going to hell in a hand basket.

[Kevin Horton]

On Mon, 26 Jan 2004 15:24:44 -0500, Morgans wrote:

>
> A buck per song is not bad? Are you nuts? That is as much or more than
> you
> would pay for a factory made cd, even more, when you consider the cost of
> the blank data disk.

It all depends on how many good songs there are on the album. If there
are only three or four good songs, then a buck a song to download them
looks pretty good to me.

--
Kevin Horton RV-8 (finishing kit)
Ottawa, Canada
http://go.phpwebhosting.com/~khorton/rv8/
e-mail: khorton02(_at_)rogers(_dot_)com

[Ron Wanttaja]

On Mon, 26 Jan 2004 15:24:44 -0500, "Morgans" >
wrote:

>
>"sean trost" > wrote in message
om...
>
>> as for downloading music. I used to be partial to Kazaa lite. but am
>> leaning towards napster again or Itunes. As these sites actually
>> support the music biz. and 99 cents per song aint bad.
>> all the best
>
> A buck per song is not bad? Are you nuts? That is as much or more than you
>would pay for a factory made cd, even more, when you consider the cost of
>the blank data disk.

It's only overpriced if you assume all the songs on a CD are of equal
value. Most are not. If you just want two or three great songs, spending
$1 each makes more sense than shelling out $15 for the three good songs and
12 awful ones. Makes even more sense if the three good songs happen to be
on different albums.

Of course, picking and choosing just a couple of songs from an album can
make you miss out on some unexpected gems. Often, my favorite song on a CD
is not the one I bought the album for.

The cost of the blank data disk is trivial on a per-song basis. I casually
collect LPs and tapes of old flying songs from the wars of the past
century, and have been copying them to my hard disk and burning compilation
CDs (gotta have SOMETHING to sing along with, on the way to the airport).
I can generally cram at least twenty of these on a single CD.


Ron "Stand to your glasses" Wanttaja

[Ron Wanttaja]

On Tue, 27 Jan 2004 02:05:20 GMT, "Doug" > wrote:

>I hate to break it to you , but downloading music is 'not' stealing ,
>regardless of what spin they put on it. No one has ever been charged with
>theft by the RIAA. What it is , is copyright infringement, and that is what
>people 'are' being charged with.

I'll agree it's not "theft" in the legal sense, but I do agree that it's
"stealing." You're using something of value without paying for it. It's
like I slipped out to the airport and flew someone else's airplane without
permission. Even if I fill the tanks after I land, most people will
consider that I stole the airplane. Criminal charges would likely be for
something else, though.

Ron Wanttaja

[DBlumel]

>I hate to break it to you , but downloading music is 'not' stealing ,
>regardless of what spin they put on it. No one has ever been charged with
>theft by the RIAA. What it is , is copyright infringement, and that is what
>people 'are' being charged with.

Uh...., Copyright infringement is a very specific type of theft. Call a "spade
a spade" lets not mince words here.

[RobertR237]

In article ers.com>, "Doug"
> writes:

>
>I hate to break it to you , but downloading music is 'not' stealing ,
>regardless of what spin they put on it. No one has ever been charged with
>theft by the RIAA. What it is , is copyright infringement, and that is what
>people 'are' being charged with.
>
>Doug
>
>

By any name you want to apply to it, it is stealing.

Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

[Bob Fry]

(DBlumel) writes:

> > A buck per song is not bad? Are you nuts? That is as much or more than you
> >would pay for a factory made cd, even more, when you consider the cost of
> >the blank data disk.
> >
> >The only fair thing to do is rip off the music industry as bad as you can,
> >for overcharging us for music all these years.
> >--
> >Jim in NC
>
> Sorry Jim, we live in a free market economy. If you don't want to buy because
> the price is too high in your estimation, that's your choice. But you cannot
> justify stealing because you think they charge too much.

Sure you can. I justify it for this reason:

"To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for
limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their
respective writings and discoveries;" US Constitution, Article I,
Section 8, Clause 8.

The US Congress passed a law which Clinton signed which extends
copyright for some works to nearly 100 years! Does that sound like
"limited times to authors"? Hell no! Congress some time ago ruined
the original intent of copyright and patents, and electronic
reproduction of text, images, and sound has made the whole notion even
more meaningless. Why is it that the little guy is forced to follow
some law which big corporations forced upon the populace; but those
big corporations don't have to follow the Constitution?

I'm for the original intent of the Constitution: authors of works
should enjoy exclusive right to their works for a limited time; then
they're up for grabs. Especially in today's rapid-paced, instantly
connected world--far different than 200+ years ago--"limited time"
should be something between 5 to 10 years for most works, probably
only 3 to 5 years for software.

[L.D.]

CW9371 wrote:

>>Don't use Kazzaa,,,, they install spyware/adware on your system...
>>
>>
>>
>
>There is also bittorrent, but there u have to have some knowledge of computers.
> Good for full albums. Emule and edonky work. Napster if u wanna pay, I tunes
>and a few others for paying. If u decide to keep something u should buy it
>however
>
>
Someone said "You're using something of value without paying for
it". when speaking of downloading music.

When I listen to music on my car radio, I am using something of value
and I'm not paying for it. Oh! shame on me. Now if I want to record it
on cassette, 8 track, CD, or even get my note pad out and write it down
to read and hum along later, that is my business. Next they are going to
tell me if I loan my hammer to someone, he or me will have to pay for it
again because he is using something of value without paying for it. I
know a hammer isn't a song but is is still "something of value".

[Doug]

Not quite...........what you describe with the airplane analogy is indeed
theft, no question about it. What downloading music is like, is I go to the
airport and make a copy of your airplane and take it for a spin. At no time
was your airplane unavailable for your use.

Doug


"Ron Wanttaja" wrote

> I'll agree it's not "theft" in the legal sense, but I do agree that it's
> "stealing." You're using something of value without paying for it. It's
> like I slipped out to the airport and flew someone else's airplane without
> permission. Even if I fill the tanks after I land, most people will
> consider that I stole the airplane. Criminal charges would likely be for
> something else, though.
>
> Ron Wanttaja

[Doug]

Uh , no it isn't theft....look it up

Doug


"DBlumel" wrote
>
> Uh...., Copyright infringement is a very specific type of theft. Call a
"spade
> a spade" lets not mince words here.

[Ross Oliver]

Morgans > wrote:
> A buck per song is not bad? Are you nuts? That is as much or more than you
>would pay for a factory made cd, even more, when you consider the cost of
>the blank data disk.


I much prefer paying $0.99 for each song that I actually want, rather
than $18.00 for 1 song that I want and 11 that I don't.

[DBlumel]

>When I listen to music on my car radio, I am using something of value
>and I'm not paying for it. Oh! shame on me.

The advertisers have paid for it for you. If you want to play the radio
stations or prerecorded music on your business music on hold system,
"rebroadcast" legally you must pay an annual fee to RIAA.

Now if I want to record it
>on cassette, 8 track, CD, or even get my note pad out and write it down
>to read and hum along later, that is my business. Next they are going to
>tell me if I loan my hammer to someone, he or me will have to pay for it
>again because he is using something of value without paying for it. I
>know a hammer isn't a song but is is still "something of value".

Actually, its more like; you are a brilliant inventor and you just invented the
hammer, nothing else like it exists. You have a patent on it and you would like
to make a living from this new invention. You don't have the financial
resources to market or manufacture large quantities of hammers so you sell your
patent or provide a license to a large corporation who will pay you a royalty
for every hammer they sell on your and now also their behalf. For a while it
provided a good and steady income for you. You quit your old job as a factory
worker and are working full time to develop other great ideas. However the
money stream has slowed and you haven't got any of your other new ideas ready
and you might have to try to get your old job back. Many early customers have
bought one of your hammers used and liked them so much they have now made
identical molds from the originals and are now giving them away for free to
anyone and everyone they know. Your dream of a secure income is quickly fading.

[Richard Riley]

On Tue, 27 Jan 2004 02:41:25 GMT, Ron Wanttaja >
wrote:

:The cost of the blank data disk is trivial on a per-song basis. I casually
:collect LPs and tapes of old flying songs from the wars of the past
:century, and have been copying them to my hard disk and burning compilation
:CDs (gotta have SOMETHING to sing along with, on the way to the airport).
:I can generally cram at least twenty of these on a single CD.

You gotta get an MP3 disk player. 10 hours of music on a disk. Last
time I was at Fry's (perhaps the only place on earth more evil than
Cap'n Zoom's office) they had one for $24.

I'd also like to take a stab at defending peer-to-peer. Shortly
before my father died he asked me to find the lyrics to a song he'd
loved as a kid -Abdul Abulbul Amir. I found the lyrics with Google in
a few seconds, opened Kazzaa, and found copies of 6 different
performances of it, spanning 50 years. None would have been available
at any price through the "legit" market. The author has been dead for
80 years - and it was stolen from him when he wrote it, in the 1870's.
No one owns the rights to it. But without a robust P2P network, I
never would have found it.

[Mark Mallory]

Jay Honeck wrote:

>
> Unfortunately, the CD player is built-in to the panel, and is only a couple
> of years old -- so I'm not looking to replace it.
>
> Any recommendations on software that will convert MP3 files to something
> that is playable on a "regular" CD player?


The .mp3 files need to be converted to .wav files in order to be saved on an
AUDIO CD (playable on a regular CD player.) Most every digital media player
(Winamp, Windows Media Player, ect.) has this capability, as well as the
capabliity to go in the other direction, ie, from .wav to .mp3. The conversion
is done by software and is a purely digital process.

You need to pre-convert, and save on your hard drive, all the .wav files you
want to put on the CD before you burn it. The conversion will take from a few
seconds to tens of seconds per track, depending on the speed of your processor.
The .wav files take up lots of space - about 10.6 megabytes per minute of
audio; roughly 10 times the space of a .mp3 - so you'll need about 800 MB free
hard disk space to fill up an entire CD-R (you'll probably want to delete the
..wav files afterwards.) The tracks on any one CD-R must all be laid down in one
burn operation; you can't do "incremental" burns where you burn several tracks,
stop, and come back later to burn more (actually you can, but most standard
players will only see the first set.)

As long as you've got an in-panel CD player and a PC with a CD burner, I
wouldn't bother with a portable MP3 player in the airplane. CD-R's are cheap
and don't take up much room, and it probably wouldn't take too many to hold all
your favorite tracks. With your MP3 collection on your hard drive, just burn
some new CDs when you get tired of the old ones.

Have fun (hope this helps...)

Mark/C182L

[Jay Honeck]

> Have fun (hope this helps...)

Thanks, Mark! It did....

Still haven't found a good solution for downloading, though. Soulseek is
obviously totally illegal, while ITunes is outrageously over-priced...

:-(
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

[RobertR237]

In article >, "L.D." >
writes:

>>
>>There is also bittorrent, but there u have to have some knowledge of
>computers.
>> Good for full albums. Emule and edonky work. Napster if u wanna pay, I
>tunes
>>and a few others for paying. If u decide to keep something u should buy it
>>however
>>
>>
>Someone said "You're using something of value without paying for
>it". when speaking of downloading music.
>
>When I listen to music on my car radio, I am using something of value
>and I'm not paying for it. Oh! shame on me. Now if I want to record it
>on cassette, 8 track, CD, or even get my note pad out and write it down
>to read and hum along later, that is my business. Next they are going to
>tell me if I loan my hammer to someone, he or me will have to pay for it
>again because he is using something of value without paying for it. I
>know a hammer isn't a song but is is still "something of value".
>
>

Your example is such a poor one that it is almost funny. First, the hammer you
loan out is something that you paid for to begin with. It is yours by right of
that payment and you can loan it or even give it away if you so desire. The
difference is that loaning the hammer to someone else denies you the use of the
hammer in the mean time and does not duplicate the hammer in the process. When
you download music, copy CD's and otherwise reproduce music without paying for
the right, you are stealing a potiential sale from the owner of the rights to
reproduce and sell the music (or software). When you listen to music on your
car radio, you are paying for that song by buying the products of the station
sponsors, who pay the stations, and the stations pay for playing the song. It
is not free.


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

[RobertR237]

In article .rogers.com>,
"Doug" > writes:

>
>Not quite...........what you describe with the airplane analogy is indeed
>theft, no question about it. What downloading music is like, is I go to the
>airport and make a copy of your airplane and take it for a spin. At no time
>was your airplane unavailable for your use.
>
>Doug
>
>

Oh but you are paying for it. That radio station has paid advertisers who use
the station to get you to buy their products. You are paying the advertiser,
the advertiser pays the station, and the station pays a fee for every time they
play the song. The fee is dependent on the ratings of the station and varies
based on the number of rated listners.

It is NOT free.

Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

[RobertR237]

In article >, Bob Fry
> writes:

>
>Sure you can. I justify it for this reason:
>

Yeah, yeah, yeah, everyone can find some justification for what they want to do
inspite of the moral and legal issues involved. Every bank robber is equally
justified in his own mind that its the only thing to do.

>"To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for
>limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their
>respective writings and discoveries;" US Constitution, Article I,
>Section 8, Clause 8.
>
>The US Congress passed a law which Clinton signed which extends
>copyright for some works to nearly 100 years! Does that sound like
>"limited times to authors"? Hell no! Congress some time ago ruined
>the original intent of copyright and patents, and electronic
>reproduction of text, images, and sound has made the whole notion even
>more meaningless. Why is it that the little guy is forced to follow
>some law which big corporations forced upon the populace; but those
>big corporations don't have to follow the Constitution?
>
>I'm for the original intent of the Constitution: authors of works
>should enjoy exclusive right to their works for a limited time; then
>they're up for grabs. Especially in today's rapid-paced, instantly
>connected world--far different than 200+ years ago--"limited time"
>should be something between 5 to 10 years for most works, probably
>only 3 to 5 years for software.
>
>

Spoken like someone who will never have to see the results of their work simply
taken because it can be done and justified because they think they have waited
long enough. Yet another example of situation ethics.


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

[nafod40]

DBlumel wrote:
> Actually, its more like; you are a brilliant inventor and you just invented the
> hammer, nothing else like it exists. You have a patent on it and you would like
> to make a living from this new invention. You don't have the financial
> resources to market or manufacture large quantities of hammers so you sell your
> patent or provide a license to a large corporation who will pay you a royalty
> for every hammer they sell on your and now also their behalf.

Would it be so simple. The music industry screws the artists as much as
they screw their customers. They are not in the business of exposing you
to as much new and interesting music as possible, or helping as many new
bands as possible get a chance to make it. They are in the business of
predictably selling their product. They only sell songs we know from
bands we like, or new songs from bands we like, or new bands that sound
like bands we like. It is all about control and predictability.

Do you travel around the country? Ever notice how you can hear a Doobie
Brothers song you haven't heard in a while (hey, they played china
Grove...cool) and them fly to CA and here the same song on the Classic
Rock station there, ditto in Denver. How'd that happen?

Playlists. Control. Money. They control what you hear with the radio
stations, see their videos, so you will buy predictably what they want.

I used Napster when it came out. I could give you a list 4 pages long of
bands I'd never heard of before, much less heard their music, that are
now on my A-list to listen to. It was awesome. All of the sudden, I had
access to any and all music out there. The barrier was down. Seeya,
record company.

Yep, it was stealing. I wonder of the members of Six Mile Bridge, a
celtic band I got turned onto through Napster, cared. What I want to
happen, is bands create web sites and sell their music directly to me,
with no music industry middle man. They are not needed. We need the
music industry giants like the Model T needed stables with fresh hay. I
can deal directly with the artist now, thank you very much.

Necessary reading if you have kids, and want to understand what the
music business is all about.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/cool/

And here's one from Courtney Love, of all people. Based on her tone,
she'd make a fine RAH participant. Testimony to congress.
http://dir.salon.com/tech/feature/2000/06/14/love/index.html

[Doug]

Bob
I'm not sure , but I think you are responding to the wrong person. Anyway,
my point isn't whether it's ethically or morally right or wrong to download
music , but that to call it 'theft' or 'stealing' is not correct. It 'isn't'
theft, it's copyright infringement and trying to equate that to theft is
wrong.

Doug


"RobertR237" > wrote in message
...
> In article
.rogers.com>,
> "Doug" > writes:
>
> >
> >Not quite...........what you describe with the airplane analogy is indeed
> >theft, no question about it. What downloading music is like, is I go to
the
> >airport and make a copy of your airplane and take it for a spin. At no
time
> >was your airplane unavailable for your use.
> >
> >Doug
> >
> >
>
> Oh but you are paying for it. That radio station has paid advertisers who
use
> the station to get you to buy their products. You are paying the
advertiser,
> the advertiser pays the station, and the station pays a fee for every time
they
> play the song. The fee is dependent on the ratings of the station and
varies
> based on the number of rated listners.
>
> It is NOT free.
>
> Bob Reed
> www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
> KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....
>
> "Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
> pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
> (M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)
>

[Gig Giacona]

"L.D." > wrote in message
...
> CW9371 wrote:
>
> >>Don't use Kazzaa,,,, they install spyware/adware on your system...
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >There is also bittorrent, but there u have to have some knowledge of
computers.
> > Good for full albums. Emule and edonky work. Napster if u wanna pay, I
tunes
> >and a few others for paying. If u decide to keep something u should buy
it
> >however
> >
> >
> Someone said "You're using something of value without paying for
> it". when speaking of downloading music.
>
> When I listen to music on my car radio, I am using something of value
> and I'm not paying for it. Oh! shame on me. Now if I want to record it
> on cassette, 8 track, CD, or even get my note pad out and write it down
> to read and hum along later, that is my business. Next they are going to
> tell me if I loan my hammer to someone, he or me will have to pay for it
> again because he is using something of value without paying for it. I
> know a hammer isn't a song but is is still "something of value".
>

But the radio station IS paying for it. As for recording you are not getting
a digitly perfect copy as you are on a download. Hence it has never been
that popular of a way to get music and it certainly didn't replace the sales
of records.

As far as the hammer is concerned if you have a way that both you and the
person or 10,000,000 people you lend it to can use it at the same time I'm
sure they will come up with a licencing agreement for the product.

Let me ask you this. Is there a price that the record industry could set
that you would then say that "Hey, I don''t need to pirate music anymore."?

[Gig Giacona]

The guy that stole money from the bank down the street wasn't charged with
stealing either but he stole.




"Doug" > wrote in message
e.rogers.com...
> I hate to break it to you , but downloading music is 'not' stealing ,
> regardless of what spin they put on it. No one has ever been charged with
> theft by the RIAA. What it is , is copyright infringement, and that is
what
> people 'are' being charged with.
>
> Doug
>
>
> "DBlumel" wrote > >
>
> > Sorry Jim, we live in a free market economy. If you don't want to buy
> because
> > the price is too high in your estimation, that's your choice. But you
> cannot
> > justify stealing because you think they charge too much. I suppose you
> would
> > only mark your products up 10% before selling, If you had anything
someone
> else
> > would want. So if you don't like a price in the store I guess you would
> steal
> > that also. Or if you though they charged you too much last time you can
> steal
> > it this time. With irrational thinking like that its no wonder our
country
> is
> > going to hell in a hand basket.
>
>

[Morgans]

Oh, look what I started. Shame on me.
--
Jim in NC

[L.D.]

RobertR237 wrote:

>In article >, "L.D." >
>writes:
>
>
>
>>>There is also bittorrent, but there u have to have some knowledge of
>>>
>>>
>>computers.
>>
>>
>>>Good for full albums. Emule and edonky work. Napster if u wanna pay, I
>>>
>>>
>>tunes
>>
>>
>>>and a few others for paying. If u decide to keep something u should buy it
>>>however
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Someone said "You're using something of value without paying for
>>it". when speaking of downloading music.
>>
>>When I listen to music on my car radio, I am using something of value
>>and I'm not paying for it. Oh! shame on me. Now if I want to record it
>>on cassette, 8 track, CD, or even get my note pad out and write it down
>>to read and hum along later, that is my business. Next they are going to
>>tell me if I loan my hammer to someone, he or me will have to pay for it
>>again because he is using something of value without paying for it. I
>>know a hammer isn't a song but is is still "something of value".
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>Your example is such a poor one that it is almost funny. First, the hammer you
>loan out is something that you paid for to begin with. It is yours by right of
>that payment and you can loan it or even give it away if you so desire. The
>difference is that loaning the hammer to someone else denies you the use of the
>hammer in the mean time and does not duplicate the hammer in the process. When
>you download music, copy CD's and otherwise reproduce music without paying for
>the right, you are stealing a potiential sale from the owner of the rights to
>reproduce and sell the music (or software). When you listen to music on your
>car radio, you are paying for that song by buying the products of the station
>sponsors, who pay the stations, and the stations pay for playing the song. It
>is not free.
>
>
>Bob Reed
>www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
>KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....
>
>"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
>pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
>(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)
>
>
>

"you are stealing a potiential sale from the owner of the rights to
reproduce and sell the music"

Ok it may be a poor example, but if it is, so is yours. Substitute hammer for music in your example. Then I stole the right of the maker of that hammer of a potential sale.

OK I do say I shouldn't copy music and sell it. Neither should I copy that hammer and sell it. I have a pretty nice shop and I've copied several tools. Now if anyone is going to tell me I can't copy a tool in my shop for my use or a friend of mine, then our country is getting worse than a dictatorship. Same goes for music.

[Jay]

He's my take on your story...

YOU are a brilliant inventor and you just invented the
hammer, nothing else like it exists. You FILE a patent on it and you
would like
to make a living from this new invention. You don't have the financial
resources to market or manufacture large quantities of hammers so you
TRY TO sell your patent or provide a license to a large corporation
who will pay you a royalty for every hammer they sell on your and now
also their behalf. But instead, they tell you that they were already
working on a similar nail pounding product in their own R&D
department, and by the way, the 100 page NDA they asked you to sign
when you walked in the door said in 8 point type that anything you
show them they can use, and they weren't going to give you the time of
day until you signed it. In addition, when you protest, they say that
if you ever do try to produce your hammer, their council will be suing
YOU for infringing THEIR nail pounding device.

So why should consumers support a system in which they are net payers?
Most of the world, and indeed, these great United States didn't
enforce intellectual property law until they felt that it would be to
their own benefit to do so. This was the late 19th century when they
started, a good 100 years like how China currently views intellectual
property.

The 2nd and 3rd worlds should hold out on the intellectual property
issue, until we stop subsidizing our agriculture which is THEIR main
export.

I'm starting to wonder if their should be such a thing as ownership of
an idea, image, sound, etc. Nothing wrong with trying to hide it, but
if its in plain view...

The recent copyright extension to 100 years, custom tailored for
Disney, is just old fashioned corruption in politics. "We'll give you
a cut of the take if you extend the law protecting our monopoly."
There was just too much money at stake and too few voters that
understand the gravity of what was changed.

And the story of someone flying your plane... you were denied nothing
by the person having benefit, so why stop them, because you didn't
gain? Thats one of the reasons file trading works so well, people can
help other people and it costs them NOTHING to do so, the good feeling
is worth every "bit".

There was a musician interviewed by MTV about file trading. They
asked him "Don't you think file trading hurts music?" To which he
answered "No man, it just hurts money." Music will always be there,
promoters may not. Bands can have concerts, remember that? The live
performance? Promoters can go get real jobs that produce something
real instead of just selling hype.


(DBlumel) wrote in message
> Actually, its more like; you are a brilliant inventor and you just invented the
> hammer, nothing else like it exists. You have a patent on it and you would like
> to make a living from this new invention. You don't have the financial
> resources to market or manufacture large quantities of hammers so you sell your
> patent or provide a license to a large corporation who will pay you a royalty
> for every hammer they sell on your and now also their behalf. For a while it
> provided a good and steady income for you. You quit your old job as a factory
> worker and are working full time to develop other great ideas. However the
> money stream has slowed and you haven't got any of your other new ideas ready
> and you might have to try to get your old job back. Many early customers have
> bought one of your hammers used and liked them so much they have now made
> identical molds from the originals and are now giving them away for free to
> anyone and everyone they know. Your dream of a secure income is quickly fading.

[ET]

nafod40 > wrote in
:

> DBlumel wrote:
>> Actually, its more like; you are a brilliant inventor and you just
>> invented the hammer, nothing else like it exists. You have a patent
>> on it and you would like to make a living from this new invention.
>> You don't have the financial resources to market or manufacture large
>> quantities of hammers so you sell your patent or provide a license to
>> a large corporation who will pay you a royalty for every hammer they
>> sell on your and now also their behalf.
>
> Would it be so simple. The music industry screws the artists as much
> as they screw their customers. They are not in the business of
> exposing you to as much new and interesting music as possible, or
> helping as many new bands as possible get a chance to make it. They
> are in the business of predictably selling their product. They only
> sell songs we know from bands we like, or new songs from bands we
> like, or new bands that sound like bands we like. It is all about
> control and predictability.
>
> Do you travel around the country? Ever notice how you can hear a
> Doobie Brothers song you haven't heard in a while (hey, they played
> china Grove...cool) and them fly to CA and here the same song on the
> Classic Rock station there, ditto in Denver. How'd that happen?
>
> Playlists. Control. Money. They control what you hear with the radio
> stations, see their videos, so you will buy predictably what they
> want.
>
> I used Napster when it came out. I could give you a list 4 pages long
> of bands I'd never heard of before, much less heard their music, that
> are now on my A-list to listen to. It was awesome. All of the sudden,
> I had access to any and all music out there. The barrier was down.
> Seeya, record company.
>
> Yep, it was stealing. I wonder of the members of Six Mile Bridge, a
> celtic band I got turned onto through Napster, cared. What I want to
> happen, is bands create web sites and sell their music directly to me,
> with no music industry middle man. They are not needed. We need the
> music industry giants like the Model T needed stables with fresh hay.
> I can deal directly with the artist now, thank you very much.
>
> Necessary reading if you have kids, and want to understand what the
> music business is all about.
>
> http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/cool/
>
> And here's one from Courtney Love, of all people. Based on her tone,
> she'd make a fine RAH participant. Testimony to congress.
> http://dir.salon.com/tech/feature/2000/06/14/love/index.html
>
>

I like your explaination, and I belive the current Napster environment is
perhaps an equitable answer. I base that statement on a quick read of
their website, nothing else, so I could be wrong. 99cents a song sounds
pretty good to have license for it, then you also don't have to buy a
whole album to get 3 good songs and 6+ lousy ones...

I don't believe they have "every" artist/lable on board though.

I would like to see perhaps an "association" of artists get a Napster-
like website going with a reasonable cost-per-song, and cut out the
middle-man.... New artists would, of course, give a few songs away and/or
make them very cheap until they became in higher demand. Older artists
could use the 99cents modal and keep a much more significant portion of
the profits!! A higher percentage of the US market will have to get
internet savy before this can work on a large scale though.


I too used Napster when it was first out and free. MANY (most?) of the
songs I downloaded were from album/cassetes I had purchased 2 or 3 times.
(why was it Styx cassete tape would only last a year or 2??).

If you truely got a "license" to the songs on an album or tape for
personal use, they should have replaced those tape for just a
"materials" charge of a buck or two.... but there is no such vehicle.
Another example is the time I had over $500 of cassete tapes stollen out
of my vehicle. Some of those were replaced with my money. The rest I
ended up replacing from Napster.... I had ZERO guilt replacing those
songs with downloaded songs.....

--
ET >:)


"A common mistake people make when trying to design something
completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete
fools."---- Douglas Adams

[ET]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in
news:WpfRb.153638$I06.1549162@attbi_s01:

>> >The only fair thing to do is rip off the music industry as bad as
>> >you
> can,
>> >for overcharging us for music all these years.
>
> No, the only fair thing to do is to use your dollars wisely, and
> purchase the best quality stuff for the lowest price available.
>
> Stealing the music is theft, and -- no matter the sins of the music
> industry in the past (which I could dispute, but that's another post)
> -- I can't condone it.
>
> That said, I agree that a buck a song is outrageously high for a
> download.

Actually, I don't see a buck a song as bad at all....

If you add up the songs on a cd that you like at all.... then divide by
the price of the cd, your much higher than a buck a song. (for most cd's
anyway... most "best of" cd's excluded...)

However, if you want to buy the cd's then rip them to your HD, then burn
the stuff you want to listen to, i've found CDEX to be a very reliable
ripping software, even for scrached cd's... it's free and you can get it
at http://www.cdex.n3.net/ , scroll down to "latest stable release" The
best part of ripping your bought CD's is you do not have to managed the
"license" files so if you want to transfer to muliple devices you will
not have to mess with making sure all the"license permissions" are in
order.

You can then burn to cd with Nero, or even direct from windows media
player on some versions of windows. Also whatever software came with
your cd burner will usually work in "burn to audio cd" mode. I ripp to
mp3 192kb/s or better, then leave a backup on the computer, then burn up
to 20 songs at a time to the disk.

I've ripped every cd I own, and they reside on a hardrive on a computer
in our entertainment center and I set media player to play various
playlists depending on the occation. for example, durring a christmas
gathering, i can play over 12 hours of christmas music without repeating
a song.... beats the heck out of finding disks, changing disks, etc.

--
ET >:)


"A common mistake people make when trying to design something
completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete
fools."---- Douglas Adams

[nafod40]

ET wrote:

> I would like to see perhaps an "association" of artists get a Napster-
> like website going with a reasonable cost-per-song, and cut out the
> middle-man.... New artists would, of course, give a few songs away and/or
> make them very cheap until they became in higher demand.

What I thought they should have done was to go ahead and give away their
music via MP3 files, but in suitably low sample rates so the quality was
perceptibly lower. Then folks could buy the real deal at max sample rate
if they liked the songs. It would have let people explore the catalog of
music, while allowing them to track what people are interested in
(marketing data) and still making a buck. They were still locked in to
the old ways.

[Jay]

"Gig Giacona" > wrote in message
> But the radio station IS paying for it.

I thought it was the other way around (Payola). The station is used
as a promotion tool to push CD sales. Any kind of fee is a formality.

> As for recording you are not getting
> a digitly perfect copy as you are on a download.

The music you download isn't perfect either, its been compressed with
lossy algorithms. I know people that say they can hear the difference
on the typical "rip". Admittedly, the 10,000th person that shares it
is getting the same quality as the first. I'm waiting for the next
compression algorithm for video. There is so much interesting juice
left in that problem to be solved.

> Hence it has never been
> that popular of a way to get music and it certainly didn't replace the sales
> of records.

Back in the day I had all kinds of cassette tapes. Some bands
actually embrace the idea and take that approach as a way to build
fans and sell concert tickets (Phish).

Remember the big stink with home taping when the VCR came out. They
wanted to make it against the law. "Oh, they'll zip past the
commercials. Thats stealing from us because our advertisers aren't
getting their products shown." Now its just a distant memory. We
lived through that, and we'll live through this.

I thought it was the other way around (Payola). The station is used
as a promotion tool.

> As far as the hammer is concerned if you have a way that both you and the
> person or 10,000,000 people you lend it to can use it at the same time I'm
> sure they will come up with a

UNENFORCEABLE licencing agreement for the product.

> Let me ask you this. Is there a price that the record industry could set
> that you would then say that "Hey, I don''t need to pirate music anymore."?

Depends on what your time is worth. If you're a teenager with a $10
month allowance, it ain't much.

[Snowbird]

"Jay Honeck" > wrote in message news:<xEcRb.155813$xy6.746734@attbi_s02>...
> We've got the PS Engineering CD/Intercom in our plane, and listen to CDs on
> long trips.

> I am obviously slipping into "dinosaur" status, as I have never downloaded
> music, for "burning" onto a blank CD. I *have* burned CDs, but I've always
> done it from tracks played off of another CD.
>
> Does anyone here download (and then burn) CDs for listening while in flight?

Well, sort of. We burn CDs of MP3 files, which we play in an
MP3/CD player. The advantage is you can get a lot more music
onto a single disk.

I also have a 256 MB MP3 player which is about half the size
of a pack of cigarettes and will hold 8-9 hrs of music, downloaded
thru the USB port of any PC.

> Any recommended sites? Tips? Are these things still free, or did all the
> freebies get sued out of existence? Thanks!

Pretty much the freebies got sued enough that people are
hesitant to put stuff out there. There are a number of sites
where one can download MP3s for a fee. This is especially
good for small recording studios and relatively unknown artists,
and we've gotten some cool stuff we really like that way.

We also record cassette tapes and even (speaking of dinosaur status)
LP records into MP3 files on our computer then burn disks. Your
kids are a bit old for it to matter, but this is especially useful
for people with young kids to entertain.

[RobertR237]

In article >,
(Jay) writes:

>> But the radio station IS paying for it.
>
>I thought it was the other way around (Payola). The station is used
>as a promotion tool to push CD sales. Any kind of fee is a formality.
>

Wrong, do you homework.

>> As for recording you are not getting
>> a digitly perfect copy as you are on a download.
>
>The music you download isn't perfect either, its been compressed with
>lossy algorithms. I know people that say they can hear the difference
>on the typical "rip". Admittedly, the 10,000th person that shares it
>is getting the same quality as the first. I'm waiting for the next
>compression algorithm for video. There is so much interesting juice
>left in that problem to be solved.
>

That depends on rather you are downloading MP3 or the original format recorded
on the CD. In the latter case, you are getting as near perfect a recording as
possible. It can be reproduced a million times and not lose one bit.


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

[RobertR237]

In article >, "L.D." >
writes:

>
> "you are stealing a potiential sale from the owner of the rights to
>reproduce and sell the music"
>
>Ok it may be a poor example, but if it is, so is yours. Substitute hammer for
>music in your example. Then I stole the right of the maker of that hammer of
>a potential sale.
>
>OK I do say I shouldn't copy music and sell it. Neither should I copy that
>hammer and sell it. I have a pretty nice shop and I've copied several
>tools. Now if anyone is going to tell me I can't copy a tool in my shop for
>my use or a friend of mine, then our country is getting worse than a
>dictatorship. Same goes for music.
>
>

Nobody is telling you that you can not make a copy for your use if you paid for
the original but when you download those copies from some source by the
MILLIONS and MILLIONS, you are participating in the theft. By the way, if you
copy that tool totally and start selling it or even giving it away in numbers
sufficient to get the attention of the original manufacturer, you will also
find yourself hip deep in trouble.

Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

[RobertR237]

In article ers.com>, "Doug"
> writes:

>
>Bob
> I'm not sure , but I think you are responding to the wrong person. Anyway,
>my point isn't whether it's ethically or morally right or wrong to download
>music , but that to call it 'theft' or 'stealing' is not correct. It 'isn't'
>theft, it's copyright infringement and trying to equate that to theft is
>wrong.
>
>Doug
>
>

Sorry Doug, but I can not accept that, it remains theft as far as I am
concerned.

But in either case, it is WRONG!

Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

[nafod40]

RobertR237 wrote:
> In article >,
> (Jay) writes:
>
>
>>>But the radio station IS paying for it.
>>
>>I thought it was the other way around (Payola). The station is used
>>as a promotion tool to push CD sales. Any kind of fee is a formality.
>>
>
> Wrong, do you homework.

Bzzzzt. You should do yours. He's not wrong. Not at all wrong. In fact,
it is much worse than he thinks. From article
http://dir.salon.com/ent/feature/2001/03/14/payola/index.html

"Does radio seem bad these days? Do all the hits sound the same, all the
stars seem like cookie cutouts of one another? It's because they do, and
they are. Why? Listeners may not realize it, but radio today is largely
bought by the record companies. Most rock and Top 40 stations get paid
to play the songs they spin by the companies that manufacture the records.

Here's how it works.

Standing between the record companies and the radio stations is a
legendary team of industry players called independent record promoters,
or 'indies.'

The indies are the shadowy middlemen record companies will pay hundreds
of millions of dollars to this year to get songs played on the radio.
Indies align themselves with certain radio stations by promising the
stations 'promotional payments' in the six figures. Then, every time the
radio station adds a Shaggy or Madonna or Janet Jackson song to its
playlist, the indie gets paid by the record label."


From congressional testimony by Courtney Love...

"The record company spends $300,000 on independent radio promotion. You
have to pay independent promotion to get your song on the radio;
independent promotion is a system where the record companies use
middlemen so they can pretend not to know that radio stations -- the
unified broadcast system -- are getting paid to play their records."

Another site
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/pdf/radioissuesstatement.pdf

Here's a company that will take your money and give it to stations
http://www.novamusic.com/radiopromo.html

[Jay]

(RobertR237) wrote in message
> That depends on rather you are downloading MP3 or the original format recorded
> on the CD. In the latter case, you are getting as near perfect a recording as
> possible. It can be reproduced a million times and not lose one bit.

Almost NOBODY downloads uncompressed music. Its just too unwieldly
with current bandwidths and tranfer protocols. Obviously you haven't
been downloading music (copyrighted or not) off the internet, LOL,
especially with a dial-up line.

I guess the important thing here is for everyone to follow their own
compass. Some people never exceed 55MPH on the freeway, most people
do it every day. I think its more a weakness of the law than that of
the majority of the population. Has something to do with federal
matching funds and states wanting the money but not wanting to enforce
the law.

[DBlumel]

>I guess the important thing here is for everyone to follow their own
>compass. Some people never exceed 55MPH on the freeway, most people
>do it every day. I think its more a weakness of the law than that of
>the majority of the population. Has something to do with federal
>matching funds and states wanting the money but not wanting to enforce
>the law.

Sounds like situational ethics to me. If it feels good do it. This philosophy
works great for the selfish until the shoe is on the other foot. Then they are
very quick to call their own lawyer to protect their interests. The name for
this is hypocricy.

[Doug]

From The Concise Oxford Dictionary

theft n. (Law) dishonest appropriation of another's property with intent to
deprive him of it permanently.

In no way does downloading music from the internet fit the definition of
theft. It is copyright infringement and nothing else.

BTW , shouting doesn't make you right, it only makes you LOUD.

Doug


"RobertR237" wrote >
> Sorry Doug, but I can not accept that, it remains theft as far as I am
> concerned.
>
> But in either case, it is WRONG!
>
> Bob Reed

[RobertR237]

In article >,
(Jay) writes:

>> That depends on rather you are downloading MP3 or the original format
>recorded
>> on the CD. In the latter case, you are getting as near perfect a recording
>as
>> possible. It can be reproduced a million times and not lose one bit.
>
>Almost NOBODY downloads uncompressed music. Its just too unwieldly
>with current bandwidths and tranfer protocols. Obviously you haven't
>been downloading music (copyrighted or not) off the internet, LOL,
>especially with a dial-up line.
>

NO, and most of those doing the majority are not using dial-up lines either.
You are right though, I am not been downloading music and don't intend to
start. If it is copyrighted, I will buy the CD or simply do without. I will
not copy and download the copyrighted material. The uncompressed versions
would only take a few seconds to download on a DSL line though and that is the
growing trend.

>I guess the important thing here is for everyone to follow their own
>compass. Some people never exceed 55MPH on the freeway, most people
>do it every day. I think its more a weakness of the law than that of
>the majority of the population. Has something to do with federal
>matching funds and states wanting the money but not wanting to enforce
>the law.

Yep, I guess if enough people want to steal your car that it should be OK too.


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

[RobertR237]

In article gers.com>, "Doug"
> writes:

>
>From The Concise Oxford Dictionary
>
>theft n. (Law) dishonest appropriation of another's property with intent to
>deprive him of it permanently.
>
>In no way does downloading music from the internet fit the definition of
>theft. It is copyright infringement and nothing else.
>
>BTW , shouting doesn't make you right, it only makes you LOUD.
>
>Doug
>
>
Theft
b : an unlawful taking (as by embezzlement or burglary) of property

No matter how you try to justify it, it is the unlawful taking of property, it
still is theft and it still is wrong.

BTW, if you are going to try and use the dictionary to prove your points, you
need to learn to read all the definitions and try to understand their meaning.
You obviously stopped when you thought you found something to justify your
point.


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

[Doug]

Sorry Bob, but it ain't theft no matter how much you would 'like' it to be.
Even the RIAA knows it's not theft. I'm also not trying to 'justify it' and
I'm not trying to say it's 'right', just that this is not theft . Anyway , I
grow weary of this ....you aren't going to open your eyes , so I give you
the last word.

Doug

"RobertR237" wrote
> >
> Theft
> b : an unlawful taking (as by embezzlement or burglary) of property
>
> No matter how you try to justify it, it is the unlawful taking of
property, it
> still is theft and it still is wrong.
>
> BTW, if you are going to try and use the dictionary to prove your points,
you
> need to learn to read all the definitions and try to understand their
meaning.
> You obviously stopped when you thought you found something to justify your
> point.
>
>
> Bob Reed

[Blueskies]

Key words there are 'limited time'. Creativity in the USA is being stifled by folks trying to extend for an indefinite
time copyrights and patents. You cannot protect intellectual property.

--
Dan D.



..
"Bob Fry" > wrote in message ...
> (DBlumel) writes:
>
> > > A buck per song is not bad? Are you nuts? That is as much or more than you
> > >would pay for a factory made cd, even more, when you consider the cost of
> > >the blank data disk.
> > >
> > >The only fair thing to do is rip off the music industry as bad as you can,
> > >for overcharging us for music all these years.
> > >--
> > >Jim in NC
> >
> > Sorry Jim, we live in a free market economy. If you don't want to buy because
> > the price is too high in your estimation, that's your choice. But you cannot
> > justify stealing because you think they charge too much.
>
> Sure you can. I justify it for this reason:
>
> "To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for
> limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their
> respective writings and discoveries;" US Constitution, Article I,
> Section 8, Clause 8.
>
> The US Congress passed a law which Clinton signed which extends
> copyright for some works to nearly 100 years! Does that sound like
> "limited times to authors"? Hell no! Congress some time ago ruined
> the original intent of copyright and patents, and electronic
> reproduction of text, images, and sound has made the whole notion even
> more meaningless. Why is it that the little guy is forced to follow
> some law which big corporations forced upon the populace; but those
> big corporations don't have to follow the Constitution?
>
> I'm for the original intent of the Constitution: authors of works
> should enjoy exclusive right to their works for a limited time; then
> they're up for grabs. Especially in today's rapid-paced, instantly
> connected world--far different than 200+ years ago--"limited time"
> should be something between 5 to 10 years for most works, probably
> only 3 to 5 years for software.
>

[Blueskies]

So you are saying it is OK to copy a few, but many copies make it wrong? Just where is the cut off? Fair use is fair
use...

--
Dan D.



..
"RobertR237" > wrote in message ...
> In article >, "L.D." >
> writes:
>
> >
> > "you are stealing a potiential sale from the owner of the rights to
> >reproduce and sell the music"
> >
> >Ok it may be a poor example, but if it is, so is yours. Substitute hammer for
> >music in your example. Then I stole the right of the maker of that hammer of
> >a potential sale.
> >
> >OK I do say I shouldn't copy music and sell it. Neither should I copy that
> >hammer and sell it. I have a pretty nice shop and I've copied several
> >tools. Now if anyone is going to tell me I can't copy a tool in my shop for
> >my use or a friend of mine, then our country is getting worse than a
> >dictatorship. Same goes for music.
> >
> >
>
> Nobody is telling you that you can not make a copy for your use if you paid for
> the original but when you download those copies from some source by the
> MILLIONS and MILLIONS, you are participating in the theft. By the way, if you
> copy that tool totally and start selling it or even giving it away in numbers
> sufficient to get the attention of the original manufacturer, you will also
> find yourself hip deep in trouble.
>
> Bob Reed
> www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
> KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....
>
> "Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
> pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
> (M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)
>

[RobertR237]

In article m>, "Blueskies"
> writes:

>
>So you are saying it is OK to copy a few, but many copies make it wrong? Just
>where is the cut off? Fair use is fair
>use...
>
>--
>Dan D.
>

There are provisions for making backup copies for the personal use of the
purchaser. What we are discussing though is downloading copies that you never
paid for or making copies and giving them away.


Bob Reed
www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....

"Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
(M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)

[Blueskies]

Making copies and giving them away is (was) fair use - there is no profit to be made or expected, and it is just
sharing. I cannot imagine how many miles of cassette tape has been recorded and 'shared'. These uses have been
convoluted and redefined by the big corporations to be now called taking or theft. It will be real interesting to see if
anyone who is currently being sued by the record industry has deep enough pockets to adequately defend themselves.

--
Dan D.



..
"RobertR237" > wrote in message ...
> In article m>, "Blueskies"
> > writes:
>
> >
> >So you are saying it is OK to copy a few, but many copies make it wrong? Just
> >where is the cut off? Fair use is fair
> >use...
> >
> >--
> >Dan D.
> >
>
> There are provisions for making backup copies for the personal use of the
> purchaser. What we are discussing though is downloading copies that you never
> paid for or making copies and giving them away.
>
>
> Bob Reed
> www.kisbuild.r-a-reed-assoc.com (KIS Builders Site)
> KIS Cruiser in progress...Slow but steady progress....
>
> "Ladies and Gentlemen, take my advice,
> pull down your pants and Slide on the Ice!"
> (M.A.S.H. Sidney Freedman)
>

[Bruce A. Frank]

My son just turned me on to "iTunes." Download the software from the web
site then go to the store and buy tunes for $.99 each. The software lets
you burn the CD directly from the iTunes program and translates from mp3
format to what ever it is supposed to be to run on regular CD players.
If you try to use you own CD burner program by just drag and dropping
the music file it won't play on regular CD players. Found some Joan Bias
(I know, Baez) and John Denver that I had never heard before. Lot of
good Jazz and there is no charge for classical music.

Jay Honeck wrote:
>
> We've got the PS Engineering CD/Intercom in our plane, and listen to CDs on
> long trips.
>
> I am obviously slipping into "dinosaur" status, as I have never downloaded
> music, for "burning" onto a blank CD. I *have* burned CDs, but I've always
> done it from tracks played off of another CD.
>
> Does anyone here download (and then burn) CDs for listening while in flight?
> Any recommended sites? Tips? Are these things still free, or did all the
> freebies get sued out of existence? Thanks!
>
> BTW: We've got FOUR new additions to the Rec.Aviation Rogue's Gallery!
> They are:
>
> - The famous (infamous?) Badwater Bill Phillips, and the zillion planes he's
> flown...
> - Ross Richardson and his super 180 hp 172!
> - CJ Campbell, world-famous flight instructor, and his fabulous 206!
> - Bryan Chaisone, and his cool Robinson R-22 helicopter...
>
> See all these guys at http://www.alexisparkinn.com/rec_aviation.htm .
> --
> Jay Honeck
> Iowa City, IA
> Pathfinder N56993
> www.AlexisParkInn.com
> "Your Aviation Destination"

--
Bruce A. Frank, Editor "Ford 3.8/4.2L Engine and V-6 STOL
Homebuilt Aircraft Newsletter"
| Publishing interesting material|
| on all aspects of alternative |
| engines and homebuilt aircraft.|