| Author
|
Views on piracy. Honesty please
|
Bleja
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
17
Posts :
84
Posted : Mar 10, 2010 20:20
|
|
what would i do without Mr. AiR,, |
|
|
Ascension
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
170
Posts :
3642
Posted : Mar 10, 2010 20:47
|
Quote:
|
On 2010-03-10 20:06, @ktif wrote:
Ok...
Consider on the other hand the target market for Logic and Cubase for example, and why they cost so much. We are not the target market I believe. Their market is acedemia and commercial recording houses that legaly HAVE to pay, or else they can't make money...tons of money.
The couple hundred you got paid for your track is not putting Logic or Cubase in the red...Consider that the profit margins in other audio industries are orders of magnitudes higher...Movie, pop music ect ect...
Psytrance producers are not killing the development of new ideas/products because your not buying your softs. As long as the the big money makers in the industry are reporting profit, so are the developers.
I know this sounds like I am attempting to justify piracy, which I am not. I am just stating that I don't think we are hurting anything...
|
|
The point of all that is that piracy isn't directly killing the market, businesses just had to adjust their models to fit. Obviously piracy hurts the market, but developers are smart enough to know people (and which people) pirate software.
 http://soundcloud.com/ascensionsound
www.chilluminati.org - Midwest based psytrance group |
|
|
|
frepp
Started Topics :
5
Posts :
30
Posted : Mar 10, 2010 21:08
|
Personally I would love to be able to buy all of the software I use, but so far I've just been able to get my Virus TI (which obviously can't be pirated ;P), Cubase 4 and a couple of plugins.
It's a money thing; I just don't make enough money to be able to buy all the stuff I want and still pay my rent and eat, so I try to buy something every now and then as far as my budget allows.
My long term goal is to be able to buy all the software I use, since I sincerely believe that the ppl who made all that lovely stuff should get paid for it. |
|
|
|
jizy
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
90
Posts :
1493
Posted : Mar 10, 2010 21:34
|
If artists r innt for the love & not for the cash then different story.
But however if I produced an album that was just as good as my CD COVER"" ID be abit pissed! Speciallly if I designd the cover.
|
|
|
|
willsanquil
IsraTrance Full Member
Started Topics :
93
Posts :
2822
Posted : Mar 10, 2010 21:56
|
Without piracy, I would not be able to make music - I just don't have the cash to buy all the software that I use. However, I do pay for some of it and that revenue going out to that developer would never have happened without piracy.
Say with the 'aid' of piracy you have an additional 20,000 users of your software - certainly one way of looking at it is that you just lost the cost of your softwarex20,000. However, it's possible that as a result of trying the software someone liked it enough to buy it - a profit for you. Not like the company had to pay for distribution or hosting 
I consider piracy awesome - it spreads knowledge and tools to the world that wouldn't otherwise have them - more people making music is good for the world.
|
|
|
|
Upavas
Upavas
Started Topics :
150
Posts :
3315
Posted : Mar 10, 2010 22:22
|
Quote:
|
On 2010-03-10 14:32, ansolas wrote:
What makes me upset is that some software companies fool the honest people who actually buy the software, when they arrogant claim that their bugs, which havent fixed for years are user errors. *digi*cough*design*
|
|
Could you be a bit more specific on that one?
On piracy, I think it sucks, generally.
Upavas - Here And Now (Sangoma Rec.) new EP out Oct.29th, get it here:
http://timecode.bandcamp.com
http://upavas.com
http://soundcloud.com/upavas-1/ |
|
|
|
Speakafreaka
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
18
Posts :
779
Posted : Mar 10, 2010 23:37
|
There are actually considerable upsides and downsides to piracy of any digital medium.
The downsides are well known - for software houses and record labels.
But if you are prepared to do things a bit differently, then piracy is really not a bad thing at all.
Firstly, piracy is absolutely fantastic advertising for a brand. I'd go so far as to say if a product is really, really good, it actually makes very good business sense to not really look to hard at making the piracy protection that great with the first version ... after all if people really like version 1, and version 2 is adding things that they really wished were in version 1, but is very very difficult to crack ... then surely, a good chunk of people are going to pay up for version 2 ... all because you didn't look into protecting version 1 that well.
Secondly - the 'we do one thing only' business model is not really very clever. For small players in the music tech market its very difficult. The reality is that your product won't, in all liklihood be as technically proficient, polished, well advertised, tested, distributed, or protected as the big players, like say NI. Going up against them in the same market and trying to compete for the same end-users dollar, will not result in payback for the amount of time invested in the product. The same is true in music distribution - small record labels cannot afford to sue illegal distribution centres in the way the big labels can, so as we can clearly see, running a psy-trance label is a fiscally difficult proposition!
What I decided in the end, for myself was that because piracy was always going to win - I have viewed it as impossible to stop from day 1 of my real understanding of it, a view which now I know a lot more about how the internet works has only been enforced - the net is fundamentally designed to share data - prohibiting this is nigh on impossible whilst the internet is still in operation.
A more adult position is to understand that charging for any media that is expressed solely in 0's and 1's is dead already, yet has not stopped twitching.
The 'market' for me, is not about selling, its about promoting. I do not expect people to buy any of my stuff, I give it away - bypassing the piracy issue alltogether.
What cannot be copied is my thought processes, and the way I do things. I use my copyable material to promote my uncopyable skillset - as a musician, as a developer.
If someone wants me to build something exclusively for them? Fine - that I charge for. If someone wants me to play for them, fine - that I charge for.
CD's, Free VSTs - Its win/win pr. I raise my profile, everyone gains tools/music. That which is genuinely useful/good rises to the top.
Much more sensible than monetising everything!
Is it right to use cracked software, download others records when they have asked you to pay for it? How should I know ... ? Its ultimately up to you to decide whether it is morally right or wrong, and I don't think the answer is clear cut. Not clear cut at all. .
http://www.soundcloud.com/speakafreaka |
|
|
|
Uedi
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
10
Posts :
288
Posted : Mar 10, 2010 23:46
|
To me piracy is good for one thing only: TRY BEFORE BUY!
After using pirated software I came to some conclusions.
1. I'm not very productive with it
2. Can't make money with the tracks. Why? Maybe because of the subliminal messages they put on the installer's music ahah!!! 
So I decided to use free stuff and the software that I can afford.
And somehow, things are going fine.
Everything that I buy pays itself off.
Valid for software and loops&samples libraries! |
|
|
|
dija
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
48
Posts :
483
Posted : Mar 11, 2010 02:33
|
Free music, free plugins. Money? no need for it in an ideal world.
That said. If you aren't making money on your tracks pirate ALL YOU WANT. It's educational, its creative, it is inspiring. It gives teenage kids and adults who could never afford a decent setup the opportunity to try these tools and use them.
I mean people who want to try film scoring out take a look at the VSL price tag. Even simple tools like Battery cost way out there. Sure time and money is spent on developement but once its done its done all they have to do is print it onto a 5 cent dvd.
If I am ever to make a complete living on music I will pirate software see if I like it or a particular sample libary and then I will purchase it properly so that I obtain all rights to use it.
Not to mention buying software your still stuck buying upgrades for life unless they take a smart approach like imageline and give free updates for life. We're entering a new age here people. Many artists release music for free. Even many tools for artists are being made for free. Compensation should come from gigging, and for the software companies people should buy what they can afford/use the most in their setups. AFTER THEY ARE MAKING MONEY WITH THEIR HOBBY. I wont lie to try everything I've tried would cost me hundreds of grand.
Not to mention a company like pro tools for example gets most of their money from big studios who have to buy the pro tools hardware to go with it etc. Nobody in their right mind creating a home studio would purchase one of these 10g pro tools rigs when you can buy a 600 dollar interface, a copy of cubase, and a decent set of monitors and a roll of foam and bass traps from foambymail.com The sad thing about pro tools is studios arent buying it because of what pro tools can do. THey're buying it because its called pro tools. So that artists think when they come to the studio wow they have a pro tools rig, i bet my recordings are going to ROCK fuckin a man they're gonna bang since they got a pro tools rig.
Also i'd like to add: there's no such thing as an uncrackable software. Cubase's dongle = fail. Sure takes the crackers a bit longer but it works. Cubase runs like a dream on my comp atm its just not working with some versions of NI plugs. The crackers will ALWAYS win in the end. Obviously the security was constructed and it can be deconstructed. I've yet to see anything that I want that is not cracked and freely available.
Support the companies that support music in a positive way by making affordable software. There's no excuse for Cubase 5 to cost 600 or 700 dollars. It's just unrealistic to the average person who wants to make music.
http://www.youtube.com/user/trawhi (tutorials)
http://www.myspace.com/eusidmusic |
|
|
|
*eLliSDee*
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
40
Posts :
671
Posted : Mar 11, 2010 07:41
|
developers work hard on the 'toys' we play with.
i've said it before. if i make any money from using their product i'll pay them their due. they deserve it. it's only fair.
i have to add, i would not have been (and is still not) able to afford to explore my talents, so thank you team air. you gave a poor guy a means to produce professionally.
|
|
|
|
ohshit
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
45
Posts :
605
Posted : Mar 11, 2010 11:02
|
Personally i see piracy as the wrong result of an imperfect business model. We are doing the transition from the classic (material) business model to the digital one. A lot of things are changing.
During the transition piracy let us have most of the benefits of the new model when some companies are still using the old one.
Again, piracy is wrong, but IMHO is better than consider rice (or corn) and bytes in the same way.
Wired's director (Chris Anderson) wrote a book titled "Free: The Future of a Radical Price". This is what i mean. Things are changing quickly.
Quote:
| Free stuff is spreading because of one fundamental difference between the bricks-and-mortar world (which Anderson calls the world of atoms) and the digital world (which Anderson calls the world of bits). In the world of atoms, each item is expensive to produce and distribute; in the world of bits, it costs close to nothing. This has all sorts of consequences. Pricing models become infinitely variable. Copying costs almost nothing, so piracy mushrooms. People can create stories, songs and movies and distribute them to other people, gratis. The collapsing costs of production and distribution are both benefiting consumers and killing companies. Wikipedia, for instance, offers the world, the universe and everything in detail to anybody with an internet connection, while destroying the encyclopaedia business. File-sharing has brought costless pleasure to millions while threatening the existence of record companies. Piracy has introduced millions of Chinese to the joys of Hollywood films while making it virtually impossible to sell music, software or recorded music in the country.
Newspapers have two sources of revenue - advertisers and readers - and the internet is taking away both. Advertising works better online than in print: try finding a room for less than £100 a week in a non-smoking, girls-only flat on the Victoria Line on Craigslist, then try the same through print. For readers, news is newsier online and not just because big companies like Google provide it free. People, increasingly, tell each other what's going on: Twitter and Flickr have been the best sources of information and pictures on the Iranian unrest. The migration of advertising on to the internet and the proliferation of free information may be killing the newspaper; many local papers in both Britain and America have shut down. Some of the spread of free stuff was predicted. When the world started to go digital 15 years ago, clever people in the music and film businesses were frightened because they knew how much easier it would make copying. But some of it is entirely unexpected. Wikipedia and open-source software, for instance, are the products of something that has floored economists - that people enjoy doing, and will do for free, all sorts of things that other people regard as work.
In this way, and in most ways, the spread of free stuff makes the world a better place. The demise of newspapers is a sad thing, but as the Iranian unrest shows, digital technology is a far better way of spreading information about governments' misdeeds than print is. |
|
source: The Guardian
In the music business we have a lot of succesful examples that i am used to mention when we are speaking about piracy: Reaper, Ektoplazm...
my 2 cents, and please forgive my english...
http://soundcloud.com/alphadelphi |
|
|
|
supergroover
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
39
Posts :
1505
Posted : Mar 11, 2010 11:04
|
Quote:
|
On 2010-03-11 02:33, dija wrote:
Compensation should come from gigging, and for the software companies people should buy what they can afford/use the most in their setups. AFTER THEY ARE MAKING MONEY WITH THEIR HOBBY. |
|
What do you mean 'hobby'? They have a company. it is their job to make software. They work hard to keep the software running and hopefully bugfree. If they'd only use their free 'hobby' time to build the software, we would still be running fasttracker and rebirth..
Artists can indeed go and get gigs.. But what can software developers do?
...
Yes exactly sell the software.
soundcloud.com/supergroover |
|
|
|
Elad
Tsabeat/Sattel Battle
Started Topics :
158
Posts :
5306
Posted : Mar 11, 2010 11:59
|
Quote:
|
On 2010-03-11 11:04, supergroover wrote:
If they'd only use their free 'hobby' time to build the software, we would still be running fasttracker and rebirth..
|
|
maybe the music was still as good tho ?
the more programs there are the less good music releases lol.
www.sattelbattle.com
http://yoavweinberg.weebly.com/ |
|
|
|
Elad
Tsabeat/Sattel Battle
Started Topics :
158
Posts :
5306
Posted : Mar 11, 2010 12:05
|
http://register.waves.com/wavesstore/storemain.aspx
LOL DUDE!! thats too much!
anywayz good old excuse is still here..
its not like they dont have it anymore.. its just a copy.
dont you wish it was possible with cars?
anywayz 32 860 $ ????
thats 122000 NIS wich in my country the minimum wage is 4000nis per month! and its not easy to make much more then that!
so.. 30 paychecks for waves? i dont think so. some people need to eat to.
how many albums should i sell in order to get that money back?
so let the hiphop producers that makes actually just abit more then me (ehm kidding , about x10000 then me) to buy and sponser the "industry" wich has almost nothing to do with psy. we are just too small. for every 100 psy tracks regular hiphop song sell more then x100 times all the trance tracks together. www.sattelbattle.com
http://yoavweinberg.weebly.com/ |
|
|
|
Speakafreaka
IsraTrance Junior Member
Started Topics :
18
Posts :
779
Posted : Mar 11, 2010 12:12
|
Supergroover - what software developers can do (which some do do) is use their software as a showcase for their talent.
For example advertise your skills using free software - which in turn leads to work developing bespoke software for individuals, which you do charge for - heavily - and don't hand over until you get paid.
For example - I'd really like this synth to have another three oscilators, and more filter modes - sure, we can do that, that'll be $xxx.
Software house is still selling software. Software house is only charging for innovation though - the bit that cannot be copied.
How is it 'moral' to be charging for a duplication of 0's and 1's ad infinitum ... ? It just isn't. Just as I don't perceive its right that say iTunes charges for a James Brown track - who is making money here, and for what reason - where is the product? All it cost them is whatever bandwidth the dl took - ie next to nothing.
This lack of any real product is even admitted by the software houses - you don't buy software, you buy a licence to use it. Madness. The whole thing is totally arbitrary. .
http://www.soundcloud.com/speakafreaka |
|
|
|
|
