The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
The sharing of mp3s, and the conversion of music from one format to another is commonplace today, and I for one take it for granted that I can log on to Kazaa, and download any tune I want. It will annoy record companies to hear that most of my music collection has been downloaded, although in my defence, I do have an extensive CD and tape collection, which I paid full price for. This media I paid for, I have converted to mp3 for my own use, and others can access it through the Kazaa network.
I still go out and buy any albums I really want, or more accurately, order online, but I do resent forking out 5 quid for a single when I can just get it through a few clicks of my mouse button.
Record companies are understandably upset about the sharing of music, and after their victory over napster, I can imagine they thought they could breathe a little easier. That was until the likes of Kazaa came along and once again undermined their ability to charge what they wanted for music.
It is certainly the case that the modern day pricing of CDs, tapes, Minidiscs and any other media needs investigating, to make sure people aren't being ripped off, but that is another issue.
Sony have now decided to start selling CDs that will only play on CD players, and cannot be read by a computer, and hence are copy protected. It is in the early stages, but a few years from now, we could see the end of mp3 sharing (with any NEW music anyway), and record companies will once again have the freedom to dictate what amount we will have to pay for singles and albums of our favourite artists.
Other ideas include restarting napster (which I believe will be going ahead) as a pay-for service, allowing only members, paying a monthly or yearly fee, to share files with other members. The file types will no longer be MP3, but files with inbuilt control functions, meaning they will only play on a certain computer, or may only be copied X amount of times.
Of course, we always have hackers, and people who do not agree with these ideas, who will be seeking to find a way around all of this, not only with technology, but with loop-holes in the law. (Which is how napster and kazaa have run for so long) Who will ultimately prevail though is anyones guess.
My point is, after having free media for so long, would you really be happy to then fork out a fee every month? If the answer is no in the majority, then who are you going to share your files with online? Only real music enthusiasts will use this service, and the available media will surely decline. Alternatively, music may be all stored on a main server by the company itself, as opposed to members machines. This would allow the companies to price each piece of media according to population of demand, and we will be back to forking out 20 quid for an album. I realise people have to make profits, but the margins are in my opinion far to large in the music industry.
So is this an end to the privelige of free media?
Thanks for reading
I still go out and buy any albums I really want, or more accurately, order online, but I do resent forking out 5 quid for a single when I can just get it through a few clicks of my mouse button.
Record companies are understandably upset about the sharing of music, and after their victory over napster, I can imagine they thought they could breathe a little easier. That was until the likes of Kazaa came along and once again undermined their ability to charge what they wanted for music.
It is certainly the case that the modern day pricing of CDs, tapes, Minidiscs and any other media needs investigating, to make sure people aren't being ripped off, but that is another issue.
Sony have now decided to start selling CDs that will only play on CD players, and cannot be read by a computer, and hence are copy protected. It is in the early stages, but a few years from now, we could see the end of mp3 sharing (with any NEW music anyway), and record companies will once again have the freedom to dictate what amount we will have to pay for singles and albums of our favourite artists.
Other ideas include restarting napster (which I believe will be going ahead) as a pay-for service, allowing only members, paying a monthly or yearly fee, to share files with other members. The file types will no longer be MP3, but files with inbuilt control functions, meaning they will only play on a certain computer, or may only be copied X amount of times.
Of course, we always have hackers, and people who do not agree with these ideas, who will be seeking to find a way around all of this, not only with technology, but with loop-holes in the law. (Which is how napster and kazaa have run for so long) Who will ultimately prevail though is anyones guess.
My point is, after having free media for so long, would you really be happy to then fork out a fee every month? If the answer is no in the majority, then who are you going to share your files with online? Only real music enthusiasts will use this service, and the available media will surely decline. Alternatively, music may be all stored on a main server by the company itself, as opposed to members machines. This would allow the companies to price each piece of media according to population of demand, and we will be back to forking out 20 quid for an album. I realise people have to make profits, but the margins are in my opinion far to large in the music industry.
So is this an end to the privelige of free media?
Thanks for reading
The sharing of mp3s, and the conversion of music from one format to another is commonplace today, and I for one take it for granted that I can log on to Kazaa, and download any tune I want. It will annoy record companies to hear that most of my music collection has been downloaded, although in my defence, I do have an extensive CD and tape collection, which I paid full price for. This media I paid for, I have converted to mp3 for my own use, and others can access it through the Kazaa network.
I still go out and buy any albums I really want, or more accurately, order online, but I do resent forking out 5 quid for a single when I can just get it through a few clicks of my mouse button.
Record companies are understandably upset about the sharing of music, and after their victory over napster, I can imagine they thought they could breathe a little easier. That was until the likes of Kazaa came along and once again undermined their ability to charge what they wanted for music.
It is certainly the case that the modern day pricing of CDs, tapes, Minidiscs and any other media needs investigating, to make sure people aren't being ripped off, but that is another issue.
Sony have now decided to start selling CDs that will only play on CD players, and cannot be read by a computer, and hence are copy protected. It is in the early stages, but a few years from now, we could see the end of mp3 sharing (with any NEW music anyway), and record companies will once again have the freedom to dictate what amount we will have to pay for singles and albums of our favourite artists.
Other ideas include restarting napster (which I believe will be going ahead) as a pay-for service, allowing only members, paying a monthly or yearly fee, to share files with other members. The file types will no longer be MP3, but files with inbuilt control functions, meaning they will only play on a certain computer, or may only be copied X amount of times.
Of course, we always have hackers, and people who do not agree with these ideas, who will be seeking to find a way around all of this, not only with technology, but with loop-holes in the law. (Which is how napster and kazaa have run for so long) Who will ultimately prevail though is anyones guess.
My point is, after having free media for so long, would you really be happy to then fork out a fee every month? If the answer is no in the majority, then who are you going to share your files with online? Only real music enthusiasts will use this service, and the available media will surely decline. Alternatively, music may be all stored on a main server by the company itself, as opposed to members machines. This would allow the companies to price each piece of media according to population of demand, and we will be back to forking out 20 quid for an album. I realise people have to make profits, but the margins are in my opinion far to large in the music industry.
So is this an end to the privelige of free media?
Thanks for reading
I still go out and buy any albums I really want, or more accurately, order online, but I do resent forking out 5 quid for a single when I can just get it through a few clicks of my mouse button.
Record companies are understandably upset about the sharing of music, and after their victory over napster, I can imagine they thought they could breathe a little easier. That was until the likes of Kazaa came along and once again undermined their ability to charge what they wanted for music.
It is certainly the case that the modern day pricing of CDs, tapes, Minidiscs and any other media needs investigating, to make sure people aren't being ripped off, but that is another issue.
Sony have now decided to start selling CDs that will only play on CD players, and cannot be read by a computer, and hence are copy protected. It is in the early stages, but a few years from now, we could see the end of mp3 sharing (with any NEW music anyway), and record companies will once again have the freedom to dictate what amount we will have to pay for singles and albums of our favourite artists.
Other ideas include restarting napster (which I believe will be going ahead) as a pay-for service, allowing only members, paying a monthly or yearly fee, to share files with other members. The file types will no longer be MP3, but files with inbuilt control functions, meaning they will only play on a certain computer, or may only be copied X amount of times.
Of course, we always have hackers, and people who do not agree with these ideas, who will be seeking to find a way around all of this, not only with technology, but with loop-holes in the law. (Which is how napster and kazaa have run for so long) Who will ultimately prevail though is anyones guess.
My point is, after having free media for so long, would you really be happy to then fork out a fee every month? If the answer is no in the majority, then who are you going to share your files with online? Only real music enthusiasts will use this service, and the available media will surely decline. Alternatively, music may be all stored on a main server by the company itself, as opposed to members machines. This would allow the companies to price each piece of media according to population of demand, and we will be back to forking out 20 quid for an album. I realise people have to make profits, but the margins are in my opinion far to large in the music industry.
So is this an end to the privelige of free media?
Thanks for reading
Hmm so I guess you spent ages writing that, then no one replies.
Oh well...
Oh well...
Internet experts claim that for every site closed down due to the legal problems, three will start up.
Also, I read that they can stop Kazaa from distributing its software but so many people have it now that they are unable to stop peer-to-peer file sharing.
As for people not buying albums anymore, that is rubbish. I will listen to tracks downloaded from Kazaa before deciding whether or not to buy the album. It could be compared to listening to new music on the radio.
Also, I read that they can stop Kazaa from distributing its software but so many people have it now that they are unable to stop peer-to-peer file sharing.
As for people not buying albums anymore, that is rubbish. I will listen to tracks downloaded from Kazaa before deciding whether or not to buy the album. It could be compared to listening to new music on the radio.
Some bands openly issue MP3s so people can listen to there music then decide if they want to buy the album. Sure i listen to MP3`s including my own stuff but if i like an album I will still buy the cd. Other point is how long will it be before we get musicdvd`s.
There is another issue about copy protection apparently there are a few albums that wont let you plat the cd on you cd/dvd rom only on a propper music cd player. The point is though that this is really quiet folly cause people are just going to use that little socket at the back called audio out.
There is another issue about copy protection apparently there are a few albums that wont let you plat the cd on you cd/dvd rom only on a propper music cd player. The point is though that this is really quiet folly cause people are just going to use that little socket at the back called audio out.
I think the music industry is over reacting with this. Sure people will download music, but MP3 players are pricey and booting up the computer to listen to a song is a chore. People will still buy the CD's because it is a more convenient format.
despite discouraging early posts, I am confident that at some point this subject will become interesting ...