Discussion in 'Open Discussion' started by Casey, Aug 13, 2002.
Why are ISOs illegal?
isos are not illegal, they are onlyt illegal if distributed to people that does not have the original copy.
the thing is nothing was stolen, so why call it stealing? that's why services such as kazaa, direct connect, napster, and etc, does not deserve to be shut down by money grubbing companies and artists. its like lending your friend your game or something, so what's wrong with that?
an ISO in itself is not illegal. It gets illegal when you make an ISO of a game and then give it to a friend or reverse, or download one from the net, since then you're using something you haven't paid for.
Oh I see...
Hope you understand that.
Oh, well excuse us in the music industry for not wanting to make any money. Because we write a song that you like, you're entitled to it for free? I don't think you appreciate the effort that we put into it. It's people like you that are killing good music and letting the manufactured plastic pop 'artists' take over.
why is this thread under "problems with games"?i suggest this should be moved,but not closed...btw:atleast someone asks why isos are illegal instead of asking where he can find isos
who are you talking about?
right, I moved this, and as long as it doesn't go out of hand I won't lock it either.
its actually pritty simple:you see a song or album you really like,but it costs money(wich most people dont have)so say it yourself,would yopu buy a album that costs 20euro or would you rather download it,wich is for free?
Not neccesarily, some might be poor
Can't agree with you there. I, and many others I know, don't just download mp3s. I use them more as a 'tester'. I will download 2-3 songs from an album, and they are _that_ good, then I will buy the CD. If the songs are crap *shurgs*, I won't buy them. That simple. And distributing MP3s over the internet is much cheaper for up and coming artists (such as myself), as it doesn't mean you having to spend a few pounds on every demo CD you to distribute...
Artists can also lose, or again, credibility (if they ever had any in the first place) on what they say about distributing music through the net. Lars Ulrich (Metallica drummer) got obsessed about people getting Metallica music from Napster, so he did everything his money grabbing capitalist hands could do to shut them down. People hate him. I know people who _love_ Metallica, and when he did what he did, they hated him for it. Dave Grohl (bad spelling) of Foo Fighters said he encouraged MP3s etc (i think it was him anyway, but that doesn't matter) and people (that I know anyway) gave him repsect, and even though they didn't really like the music, bought the odd single, or even an album...
[-edit-]Also, if you're in the music business to make money, then you're in it for the wrong reasons. You should be in it to make music, and let others enjoy it. Anything after that (money) is a bonus. Pop-whores are in it for the same and the money. Other people write their songs, and sing them most of the time too. That's ****ed up. Half them are too dumb to know what MP3 is, never mind have an opinion on it.[/-edit-]
I totally agree Dixon. The mp3 is a great way to test out singles and stuff from an album to decide whether to buy it. I think the main problem is the ridiculous price of CD's these days. Back in the mid 90's I used to buy CD's all the time, cause new ones would be like 11 or 12 bucks, and older CD's would often be even cheaper than that. Now new CD's at most music store are about 18 bucks, and older CD's sometimes can be even more than that! (they're branded as "rare - hard to find classics" so they can jack up the price). I don't care if artists are getting more money or whatever... CD's are like the cheapest thing in the world to make - I think I read that it costs like 20 cents to make a commercial CD (and most of that is from licensing and stuff, actual manufacturing was like 2 cents).
Add the fact that in my opinion most new music these days sucks, and albums seem like they're getting shorter and shorter. It's just not worth 18 bucks to me. The record companies say that prices are that high because of mp3's and illegal distribution. Not so. I remember CD prices were that high before Napster even existed, and maybe about 2% of the population had broadband internet connection. So that's just a load of BS. So yeah, THAT'S why I download tons of mp3's.
Sure you can "lend" it to someone on the internet but you'd have to destroy your own copy. It's not the same thing as lending someone your CD, because in that case you won't have it anymore (until/if they return it). Unless you're authorized to make copies of the game it's illegal to do so.
I think artists and developers deserve money, but not necessarily the managers and distributors. They get the majority of the profits and they don't even deserve it. I remember this one incident with Pearl Jam (I think it was them) who tried to do a concert for free but their managers wouldn't let them. They took it to court but lost in the end. Now I'm just thinking, if the artists are the ones who write and perform the music then they should be able to do what they want with it, right? Instead their lousy, money grubbing managers get in the way and try to dictate what they can and cannot do. I think that is just so sad.
I agree with Dixon and Smooth Playa. MP3s are a great way to test out music before you buy it. I also think prices of CDs are way too high and the thing is, there are only a couple of singles on it that you like and you have to pay $15+ for it. I think it would be better if they had an on-line store, where you can pick and choose the music you want. I would gladly pay $20 for a CD full of good music that I hand-picked myself.[/edit]
It cost money to make games. (We are talking in the millions of dollars for a high production game)
How do you think developers pay off the cost of making those games?
You guess it, from the sales of those games.
Youve got to admit though, some games are over-priced and still prices for games are getting higher and higher, 65 dollars for Neverwinter Nights, thats pushing it. Even though NWN is a great game.
everyone knows it takes money to make money.
selling pirated software is wrong period, but users does not make any money on p2p networks.
But the developers lose money on each copy. For each copy made they lose a potential customer.
actually, many people wouldnt buy the stuff they copied anyways.
It's funny when a company screams $ <name an amount> being lost, but,
if the game really wouldnt be copied, it wouldn't mean they'd sell that much more. Maybe a little, but most people probably still wouldnt buy it.
Separate names with a comma.