TorrentFreak

The place where breaking news, BitTorrent and copyright collide

Jamie Cullum Admits to Being an Ethical Music Pirate

English singer-songwriter Jamie Cullum has admitted that, like many of his fellow Brits, he is an avid music pirate. While noting that as many copies of his album have been downloaded illicitly as bought officially, Cullum says that punishing file-sharers is out of the question. Only cutting-edge legal services have the solution.

cullumIFPI and the BPI would have people believe there are millions upon millions of illicit file-sharers in Britain, milking the very life-blood out of the industry. Much of their online presence is gearing to achieving this impression.

While the situation is a lot less serious than they make out, it’s difficult to dispute that in the absence of really attractive alternatives, large numbers of people are indeed turning to file-sharing networks and services to satisfy their music discovery needs.

The BPI and their international counterparts would also like to create the impression that the situation is very much black and white, that an illegal downloader engages in his or activities in order to get music for free and thus never makes a contribution to the industry. But this assertion, that file-sharers don’t contribute in any meaningful way, is simply false and definitely not that black and white.

Many people are using file-sharing as a music discovery tool. Indeed, file-sharers are some of the industry’s most knowledgeable and dedicated followers, but those who have simply found new, more efficient and increasingly user friendly ways to acquire music. They are, however, happy to put their hands in their pockets for the right products, for the right concerts and for quality merchandise.

One such individual is English singer-songwriter Jamie Cullum, who in a recent interview admitted that, like many of his countrymen, he is an avid user of file-sharing networks to acquire illegal copies of music.

“I’m a music consumer of the highest order, and I spend an awful lot of my time looking for music, buying music, downloading music legally and illegally. I make no bones about it – if there’s some Thom Yorke EP floating around and it’s not out until next week, then I’ll download it illegally,” he explained.

But like many file-sharers, Cullum’s connection to the music doesn’t stop there. “However, the following week I’ll buy it because I want the artwork, and I want to see the notes and to find out where it was recorded and all the rest,” he added.

The flip side, says Cullum, is that his own album ‘The Pursuit’ has also been heavily pirated after being leaked online, with file-sharers downloading it as many times as it was legally purchased. Cullum shares the views of many when he says that all-out rampant piracy is not the answer, but nor is taking measures to punish file-sharers.

“The problem is, we’ve gone too far. You can’t start punishing people – you’d be punishing people like me, who spends thousands of pounds a year online, because I illegally downloaded something from a blog,” he says pragmatically.

The solution to the problem, says Cullum, lies with competition. Somehow the music industry needs to come up with legal services that are “so sophisticated and so comprehensive” that people won’t be interested in going to file-sharing sites.

Jamie Cullum begins his next US tour in March 2010 and won’t have much difficulty selling-out his chosen venues. Just how many of the people in attendance will have experienced his music after getting some samples from file-sharing networks is open to speculation, but they will be there – spending their money and supporting the artist.

In the end, perhaps that’s all that matters.

Related Posts

Previous Post | Next Post

  • KingKong

    He should have his internet connection removed ;)

  • Zush

    Jamie makes no bones, and Jamie has balls.

  • SomeGuy

    Couldnt fault a single word..

  • The cowboy from village people

    Hey wait a minute, he is wearing a Santa hat? Can’t father christamas sue him for copyright…

    *dances to YMCA*

  • Anonymous

    I don’t have a clue who this person is actually. Of course I now can go to my favorite torrent site, download the music, give it a try and, if I like it, buy it in the stores.

  • omfg

    Somehow the music industry needs to come up with legal services that are “so sophisticated and so comprehensive” that people won’t be interested in going to file-sharing sites.

    and free ;)

  • gorehound

    to bad that asshole greedbag industry won’t come up with a plan other than fining folks millions.

    boycott all riaa greedbag studios

  • Ryan

    It’s true. I used to like Lilly Alan, after he rampant crusade I stopped listening to her on Spotify. I was planing to go see her in concert too but not anymore. GG.

  • Fathead666

    The thought that someone would turn around and pay for something that they can own for free is beyond the realm of common sense.

    Anyone that says they use P2P to “try” media out before they go out and buy it is a complete and total liar. That claim is simply used to justify their illegal means of acquiring something. This might be true for someone who has money to burn, but surely this is the exception and not the rule.

    If you’re gonna pirate music, movies, games, or whatever, at least grow a set and admit that you enjoy getting something for free and that’s why you do it.

    That’s the problem with this world. People just don’t want to admit to things and face the truth. If more people would just man up and tell the truth about things and quit trying to hide behind excuses then the world would probably be a much different place.

    Me, I download because it’s free and as long as something is available for free, I have absolutely no intention of paying for it. Anyone that says otherwise is either a fool, a liar, or a little of both.

  • Moral Highground

    @9 thats all well and done, but you saying that people should just admit to pirating music while hiding your identity as an anonymous internet user is foolhardy.

    You are a lot harder for the lawyers to find than he is, if he openly says yeah Im a pirate cos I can get it for free….
    He will have the lawyers on him like a pack of rabid dogs,, and then every halfwit on the internet condemning him cos he can afford to buy the music in the first place.

    Fair play to the guy, he stood up to be counted.
    And for the record, if its free Im gonna steal it too, so please don’t take this as an attack on you or your comment.
    Think of it more as an alternative viewpoint.

  • IAmAI

    “…an illegal downloader engages in his or activities in order to get music for free and thus never makes a contribution to the industry.”

    The recording industry and failed consumers and musicians alike. As far as I’m concerned, the recording contribute nothing to our music culture; in fact they are detriment. The industry can either collapse and disappear or find a new business model that actually treats consumers properly. As the industry stands now they do not deserve my money and they will not get it.

  • KingKong

    @9

    I don’t have money to burn but I like to try before I buy, I don’t want to waste good money on bad music.

  • oddcat

    I have plenty of cash, probably because I don’t like burning it it or wasting it on crap in a nice wrapper. I just watched Invictus and will be giving Clint and Morgan my cash next week at the cinema. Not because I give a crap about the law but because the movie is worth it. Happy Christmas.

  • Pingback: Jamie Cullum Admits to Being an Ethical Music Pirate | TorrentFreak | Music Topics Blog

  • @9

    Right yeah, because if it is true for you then it *must* be true for everyone else, right?

  • Tigger

    @9 Fathead666 –

    “The thought that someone would turn around and pay for something that they can own for free is beyond the realm of common sense.”

    First off, i dont have money to burn, im one of the bottom 1% of earners in my country, ive been saving a whole year to try and buy a car – and i still cant affford one….BUT….

    A few months ago i PAID to see “Zombieland” in the cinema, i recently DOWNLOADED “Inglorious Basterds”.
    I recently DOWNLOADED some “High Contrast” but PAID for “Rage Against hte machine” as well as “HTID 2009″
    I very recently PAID for “Left 4 Dead 2″ but DOWNLOADED “The Saboteur”

    If i had more money, i wouldnt mind pissing it away, but im still not buying shitty products.
    Sure i like getting stuff for free, but if its a truely decent product, im still happy to pay for it. Im also going to a gig in the new year, ticket cost me £30, and im sure ill buy a t-shirt or a poster.

    “Anyone that says otherwise is either a fool, a liar, or a little of both.”
    - Most of my friends are pretty much the same as me, or even Jamie Cullum for that matter. So we’re all fools and liar’s because we disagree with you?
    Your opinion is valid, i even appreciate it, but please dont judge the rest of us to be the same as you….because…we’re not! =)

  • ws

    Who is Jamie Cullum?

  • Loonytoad Quack

    @16 – This is the internet. Google is your friend.

  • DeathStalker

    Well, at least he’s got the right attitude. I can’t tell you how many THOUSANDS of dollars I’ve spent in CDs/DVDs/concert tickets/merchandise for bands that I would have *ONLY* found through file-sharing! These are bands like Nightwish, Within Temptation, Mortiis, Lacuna Coil – bands that will NEVER see the light of day on any US radio station because of the record conglomerates! THAT in itself should be illegal (the lack of PROPER worldwide exposure, I mean). I don’t want to be hearing just the latest winner of American Idol on the radio 24/7 (gods I *HATE* that show!!!)

    The industry needs to wake up and learn the retail term “loss leader” – the cheap stuff that stores sell at under cost (or give away) to get you in so they can sell you more. People used to buy albums because of the great artwork and lyrics – now you usually get a bare-bones disc and cover. Give the buyer something that he/she can’t download – or something “special” for the purchase! Be INTELLIGENT for a change!

    but they never will, and so they will (eventually) die out like the dinosaurs.

  • GuyFawkes

    DUDE THIS MR. JAMIE IS A COOL GUY

    ===============================
    HOORAY 4 JAMIE CULLUM STATEMENT
    ===============================

    ktks

    and let´s pay for see him live :)

  • Anonymous

    The real way to support bands is go to the shows, buy the merch there, don’t give a cent to these multimillion dollar corporations, and buy from indie labels as well, or pirate. :D

  • Eric G

    I don’t usually try-before-I-buy on music but I definitely try before I buy on films and games.

    Part of that is because of the economy of scale. Games and films typically cost more than music, and as such I am more inclined to investigate all avenues before I purchase.

    I’ve pirated games like the Call of Duty series, Battlefield, played private-server WoW. I’ve downloaded countless blockbuster films.

    But you know why I go back to the retail copies if I like the product? They offer more than you can just download. Games have multiplayer experiences, downloadable content, expandable libraries. Movies have extra content and features that aXXo and the like don’t bother including. There is just something [extra] received by shelling out your money.

    And Cullum says that it is just the same for him with music. Audiophiles want the physical vinyl to touch, they want the album art to enjoy and tack on their walls. The ability to hold their music in their hand, instead of in a device.

    That’s what you are paying for–an experience :)

  • Mark

    What the industry needs is more places like iTunes – free album artwork, lyrics, no drm, cheap tracks, previews, album deals ect..

    Oh and they have to be open formats, Eg: if iTunes sold MP3′s I’d start buying but I hate the iTunes format (m4a or whatever it is)

  • TerribleTony

    What happens when the artwork is shit?

    I would prefer a DONATE button, thanks.

  • Brian P

    Cullum speaks truth. The best way for the music industry to evolve now isn’t rampant lawsuits to try to make things the way they were, they should be spending that lawsuit money to come up with a digital music sharing alternative that’s SO good, people will move away from bittorrent. You can’t tell me that if someone like Warner Brothers wanted to, they couldn’t use their resources to make the greatest file sharing site there is. If you charged people a reasonable fee, they’d use it. I would.

  • UK IN DA HOUSE

    @24: No m8, your a idiote, just stop talking

  • whoo FLung Dung

    He’ll be getting a notice from ACS:Law then , soon in the New Year.

    http://acs-law.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=77:a-christmas-update-from-acs-law-&catid=1:latest-news&Itemid=50

    Then again, if it’s not beneficial, they might just drop the case, esp as he’s semi-famous and might provide negative publicity…
    Happy Christmas

  • Jon

    @24 Your right, but don’t expect to see a reasonably priced service from the music industry soon. They will try to charge you the CD price for a digital copy.

    The music publishing industry has always tried to stop change, they tried to stop the change from records to the music cassette, they tried to stop the change from music cassette/records to CD’s and now they are trying their hardest to halt and slow the change from CD to digital distribution.

    Of course you know, and I know and *they* know that this change was inevitable. So why are they trying so hard to slow progress? Simple, they want to retain as much of the monopoly they had over music publishing and distribution as they had during the CD era.

    The music industry and specifically the big labels and publishers are desperately trying to find some way to retain a monopoly. They know that once the initial cost of production is done, every digital copy is then free.

    The big labels want the same market conditions back that they had when they were price gouging customers and illegally inflating the price of CD’s. They can smell the money to be made from outrageous margins on essentially free to manufacture digital copies.

    Bottom line, big music labels care only about monopoly level profits. Artists & consumers are the bottom of their list of concerns.


    TV Episode Calendar & Guide
    http://epguide.info

  • Lena

    I remember back in the day cd’s when they came out they were supposed to be like $12 and instead they were 17-24.99. The http://www.mafiaa.org lost a class action lawsuit for price fixing with sam goody , musicland, and blockbuster b/c they had set prices to rip consumers off. After this went on for years, the class action was finally awarded and everyone got like $15 if they purchased a cd within the last 8-9 years from *.* studio. This doesn’t matter that the consumers were ripped off for 8-9yrs (probably more be4 this) and that $15 is supposed to make em happy. Mafiaa is bad, very bad.

    Also the notion of not trying before you buy is nonsense. If i find something via p2p and then see it somewhere for the right price, I may pay for it. If I don’t like the price and its not a good product, no thank you.

    http://www.sharethefiles.com

  • JTK

    The music industry is a business like any other business, so they need to keep their services and products competitive. You don’t see Microsoft getting angry and suing Steve Jobs when Mac sales go up, do you?

  • Anonymous

    @Fathead666

    “Anyone that says they use P2P to “try” media out before they go out and buy it is a complete and total liar.”

    Really? Where’s the proof to back up that statement?

    It looks like you haven’t provided any. I wonder why. Could it be because you pulled that statement right out of your stinking ass? Could it be that you are a complete and total liar?

    Yes, and yes.

    You can’t provide any proof because you and I both know very well that it doesn’t exist. That’s why you carefuly avoided it. You think that if you word a lie as though it were a well known fact, people will be psychologically more inclined not to question it because they don’t want to look like fools who don’t know a well known fact.

    Sorry. People notice. Maybe with the exception of a few gullible saps, but not enough to matter. I’m afraid few filesharers will admit to the fiction you want them to admit to.

    So go push your lame propaganda elsewhere, little MAFIAA boy.

  • hifh606

    good to see someone talking some sense. If only the industry would sit up and listen.

  • Wolfy

    @9

    i downloaded Street Fighter IV, liked it and then bought it. Mainly to get the online features ;)

  • Brian P

    @27 Of course. It happened with cassettes, it happened with VCR’s. They’re kicking their heels in a little harder this time, but it’s essentially the same. Sooner or later they’ll bow to the weight of the inevitable. Specifically when someone at one of the major companies comes up with a system that’ll make a great deal of money (moreso than iTunes, which is not really there yet) the rest will just copy it and that’ll be that. They certainly know it’s inevitable, there’s a demand for near-instant digital music distribution and someday they’ll try to fill it themselves. The ones who’ll actually get sh*t on in all this is people who own and run CD stores, who are already feeling the pinch. But there’s no particular reason for the record companies to care about them.

  • Brandon

    Jamie Cullum = Elevator Music… Cool that he his a Pirate though…

  • Lothor The Evil

    @9 Fathead666

    Who the hell are you to call everybody a liar? Do you know every single file sharer on the planet and know for a fact that not one single person is “trying before buying”? And that not one single file sharer actually buys something they downloaded first? Do you have proof of your accusations that every file sharer is a liar?
    As for me, I’m not going to be as nice as the other commenters.
    SPEAK FOR YOURSELF ASSHOLE!
    I suppose next you are going to say people who test drive cars never buy a new car. Or that people who try on a pair of pants to make sure they fit before they buy it at Wal-Mart never will buy the pants.
    There are endless possibilities why people try something before they buy it. People do actually buy stuff they get for free first dumbass.
    It’s one thing to admit why you do something, but you DO NOT speak for everybody. I hope you washed your socks before you put your foot in your big mouth.
    As for Jamie Cullum, it sounds to me like he listens to alot of music for inspiration, and actually DOES buy alot of the albums after he downloaded it for free. Never call anybody a liar unless you can prove they are in fact lying.

  • Lothor The Evil

    @30 Anonymous

    [ "Really? Where’s the proof to back up that statement?

    It looks like you haven’t provided any. I wonder why. Could it be because you pulled that statement right out of your stinking ass? Could it be that you are a complete and total liar?" ]

    Wow. Great file sharers think alike. I stopped reading at @9 Fathead666 to write a response, and it looks like you beat me to it. So I didn’t see your comment before I typed mine in. Sorry for basically repeating what was already said.

  • diarRIAA

    I’m what you would call a “high end” audiophile consumer. I buy nothing but the finest entertainment gadgets for my household. I own a monster high end television, high end 7.1 digital surround sound system, a custom built high end multimedia computer with HDMI running to my widescreen TV and digital coaxial out to my sound system for 7.1 surround sound. I also have high end leather furniture so I can relax and enjoy my music and movies in the most lavish and relaxing of comforts. I bought the finest in car stereo, amplifier and subwoofer that I can possibly buy, and I own the latest and greatest in portable Apple gadgets that money can buy.

    Bottom line is, I have alot of disposable income and I like the finest things that money can buy. I’m exactly the kind of consumer that the media corporations want, but they aren’t getting my money. I’ve chosen to boycott them due to their legal antics against consumers like me.

    The last disc I bought years ago was an accidental discovery. I was bored and went to a music shop and went passed the Z’s and came to the DVD-Audio section. Hmmm…a music disk that said it was digitally remastered in Dolby DTS in 5.1 sound? I thought “WTF?” so I quickly bought it and rushed home and slapped it in. I was completely blown away and I felt like I had discovered music for the very first time. That disc was Fleetwood Mac’s Rumors album and it was 3.5 times more expensive than the average CD. It was well worth it so I quickly rushed back to look for more DVD-Audio artists. I was disappointed as I was told that they were no longer manufacturing them, and that newer artists aren’t releasing their material in DVD-Audio.

    WTF? Who decided that this was not worth selling to high end consumers? Was it some fat red faced executive who couldn’t hear or recognize the incredible audio experience so they decided to just flog lossy and hollow mp3′s instead? Why wasn’t DVD-Audio mass marketed? I had never even heard of it until I accidentally came across it, and I’ve been a music lover for 35+ years!

    Music today isn’t really worth buying. Low quality lossy and hollow sounding mp3′s just don’t do it for me, but what alternatives do I have? If popular/modern artists were released on DVD-Audio DTS heck I’d buy them even if it meant that the executives were gobbling up most of the profits.

    Audiophiles like me want the very best and not the very worst. I suspect that many consumers out there with money to spend feel the same way. For now, it’s back to stealing/downloading mp3′s for free until the media corporations either bring out competing products that are worth buying. I will also support the artists directly by going to their concerts and buying merchandise directly from them.

  • Tesla

    fathead666 – some folks are indeed leech like material.

    Others however, find new things and don’t want them to vanish and so do contribute to the musicians by buying cd’s etc.. to make sure they can continue.

    I do believe, because I do the same.
    There are many pluses to p2p music.
    How many of you and your friends hear of new things this way, quickly dl it, enjoy it then go buy it for themselves or as gifts?
    Yes, a percentage fails but many contribute.
    If my favourite artists fail or otherwise vanish because of me I would not be happy, therfore I will always pay for what I really do want.

    Sometimes you simply can’t find it or even order it. I spent 2 years trying to find some Jimmy C. Newman.
    Looked through several order catalogs at all the local record stores only to find 1 tape!??
    I did order it, but I have to say If we heard it and we cannot find it, what do we do? Sending the artist is useless if you can’t find them(like they aren’t busy anyway).
    Writing letters to record companies got me zero results as I am not a dealer so why should they care about my $15……

    Some folks pick up the trash when no-one is watching………some don’t care.

    $6 billion owed to musicians is in the news too, I see a far greater problem there…. I’d be more bothered by that. And since hearing of this..ARG, I hope they burn forever whilst plugged into thier worst nightmare of entertainment.
    Any decent music lover would never stoop so low. pat, pat, stab, stab..atrocious, friends fathead?

  • lverona

    I do not agree. File sharing allows people to get information quickly and for free. No matter what “legal” service they are going to try to present, the only people who would be likely to buy music from there are those who either believe the artists get something or who just believe that downloading a file without permission is a crime against society.

    Saying -you were getting all the music for free and with no problems, now here’s a way for you to pay for every file you download and also have constant problems with the service (as all services have outages, bugs, registration process problems, DRM, etc) – is weird. I do not need a service, I need to be left alone and be allowed to download any file without asking permission of someone else.

  • AnarchyNow

    Another dreaming shitty singer, there’s no competition against freedom, if it’s 0€ the useless record companies can’t compete with all their big STOLEN money and we want the CHOICE: to pay or not to pay, personally I prefer spending on HARDWARE rather than SOFTWARE 0s & 1s

  • Anonymous

    @9

    You really must think very little of people to assume that we are so unwilling to fairly compensate an artist or developer. Perhaps you are holding your own failings against others? Like most other decent people, so called pirates are aware of general ethics as well.

    If I download a PC game that I like, I buy a legal copy. If I dislike it, I uninstall and delete the product from my hard drive. If I enjoy a movie, I see it at the theater or buy a DVD. If I download an album, I purchase the tracks that I liked. If I download an ebook that I enjoy, I buy a hard copy.

    In the year of 2009 alone, I easily spent $1,500 US on the types of products listed above. In addition to that, I purchased new entertainment equipment from which royalties were payed to various industries. In my case, entertainment groups ended up with more of my money because of piracy.

  • ROLF

    good lad!!

    Happy Christmas!

    btw. look @ TBP avatar seeder:leecher ratio – gone crazy! :))

  • Jose

    This guy is confessing a crime, and btw, you buy an album to see where it was recorded? hah!

  • THEcheese

    well…i see CD’s as ADVERTISING because lets face it, going legal = youtube will have to go. followed shortly by google videos, megaupload, all p2p and rapidshare etc. etc. google search restrictions….children prosecuted

    the alternative being mass censorship

    concerts = money
    CD’s = come to my concerts

    this concept is quite obvious to all us musicians, but to the old folk who have just recieved their first laptop and government (one man in particular) this is still too difficult to comprehend -.-

    despite this i pre-ordered an album a few weeks ago because i loved the pianist. i downloaded lilly allen because i didnt even know her
    when the producers start shutting down is when we start to care and that just isnt going to happen.

  • Justin

    There’s a couple completely independent bands that made a couple hundred dollars off of me because I illegally downloaded a couple of their songs and liked what I heard.

    Similarly, I can’t think of anyone I’ve hurt through downloads. If I like what I hear, I typically buy everything they have. If I don’t, I never would have bought their stuff anyway.

  • ???

    @ 32
    so your telling me if it didn’t have any “special” features that required a legit copy then you wouldn’t have bought it thanks for proving #9 right I’m sad to be a pirate because other pirates don’t have the balls to admit that they do it because its free…

  • Ninja

    @ 9 Dec 23, 2009 at 15:29 by Fathead666

    Speak for yourself. At least you admit you are an… idiot.

    @ 18 Dec 23, 2009 at 17:22 by DeathStalker

    Wow, that’s what happened to me, a friend of mine sent me some songs from those groups and I went to the net to get more and ended up buying stuff from them and discovering many other groups while browsing the torrent sites. That’s what I love in P2P, it enables you to spend your money on good stuff only and introduces you to awesome artists you’d never know.

    @ 21 Dec 23, 2009 at 18:20 by Eric G

    Agreed. But I’d rather have the content without extras and with a shi**y cover for a better price in some cases. It’s about supporting the work or being addicted. If it’s the first you’ll want cheap stuff, if it’s the second you’ll pay whatever.

    I’ve read the other comments and most are just what has been repeated ad nauseam here in TF. Offer stuff for sane prices and we’ll buy it – except for a small percentage. Drivers don’t usually drink and drive but there’s always the small irresponsible percentage that does.

    Also, diarRIAA comment is interesting since it is true that there are the ones that will pay whatever for the content, either because they are audiophiles or because they are addicted fans. Maybe it is time MAFIAA and merry friends started doing business with that in mind offering cheap for the mainstream and exclusive for the fans.

    I’m not arrogant enough to say I know how to do it or that it is simple to develop a model that is good for all ends but I will say that they are losing the evolution train refusing to adapt. It was said here and I will say it again: giving our money to ANY company is a privilege, not an obligation. The companies that doesn’t deserve our money are bound to die at some point.

  • Anonymous

    I think if the argument is that you want to try before you buy music, then there are plenty of alternatives to downloading full copies of songs or albums – websites such as YouTube and Grooveshark provide a great way of listening to full songs. Even iTunes provides 30 second previews – enough to glean a general impression of an artist you are unfamiliar with.

    Personally I download music because it’s the easiest, most convenient and cheapest (free) way to get hold of it. Also it comes in the correct format for my iPod. I don’t think I’ve ever bought the same album on CD after I’ve downloaded it in digital format (although some of my first downloads were the same albums as I had previously purchased and later lost, sold, or lent to friends never to see again :-)) Come to think of it, I don’t actually own a CD player anymore. Furthermore, It would be highly unlikely for me to pay for a legal digital copy of an album or track once I have already acquired an illegal copy.

    I think Jamie’s argument to justify or condone file sharing is invalid for the majority of file-sharers.

    But this doesn’t mean that record companies are justified in suing the hell out of their customers, or websites offering services that they themselves are incapable or unwilling to offer.

    We need to find a way of remunerating artists fairly for their music.

    It’s obvious that millionaires like Simon Cowell, who rake in most of the profit from musical talent, will be unwilling to give up their massive cuts of profits obtained from traditional album sales. Imagine a thousand Simon Cowells running the music industry and willing to do anything to hold onto their lucrative positions – that image is probably pretty close to the truth.

    Artists need to look into other ways of distributing their music – perhaps by BitTorrent? Then rely on merchandise or concert ticket sales to make a living.

    Meanwhile court action is set to continue interminably…

  • torrent wiki
  • Anonymous

    @48

    I think if the argument is that you want to try before you buy music, then there are plenty of alternatives to downloading full copies of songs or albums – websites such as YouTube and Grooveshark provide a great way of listening to full songs.

    I have thought of this too, and my question is this: If this is true, then what is the difference between downloading a track and streaming it?

    If I want to listen to certain music, I can grab a torrent for it, or I can go to playlist.com or a similar site and stream it. Either way I’m getting the music for free, so what’s the distinction? The only one I can think of is that actually downloading the track creates a copy of the song that I can actually do something with… but in all practicality, since I can re-stream a song as many times as I want, there’s no real difference in that regard.

    Downloading an unauthorized copy might technically violate copyright law, but is there an actual moral or ethical reason why this act should be condemned, in this context?

  • boushh

    “Audiophiles” make me laugh.
    Stop pretending that you have super-sensitive hearing and can hear more than the average human being. And that such small changes are really obvious to you and entirely change the experience of listening to music. Regular mp3s are “hollow”? Then how did they become so popular and widely-accepted by society? Your claims are complete nonsense!

    You seem to only use the term (“audiophile”) because it makes you feel important or special to be referred to as such. But you actually just sound like pretentious fools.

    Get over yourselves and stop wasting YOUR money and OUR time. ;)

  • BTGuard - BitTorrent Anonymously

NewsBits

Even more news...

  • Blu-ray Anti-Piracy Tech Stops Discs and Promotes Purchases

    An anti-piracy system present in all official Blu-ray players since 2012 has received a fresh update...

  • Foxtel Breeds Pirates by Locking Up Game of Thrones

    One of the main reasons why people turn to piracy is the lack of legal alternatives....

  • UK Student Admits Breaching Sony Copyrights With Leak of PS3 SDK

    Last year an Internet user known as El Nomeo leaked version 3.70 of Sony’s Playstation3 SDK...

  • Pirates Can Be Identified Despite Sharing IP Addresses, ISP Claims

    Carrier-Grade Network Address Translation is a network mechanism through which many Internet subscribers can share the...

  • Feds Seize Cash from Major Bitcoin Exchange’s Dwolla Account

    The U.S. Government has taken a significant action against the web’s top Bitcoin exchange by seizing...

MostDiscussed

Below are TorrentFreak's most discussed articles of the past month. Join the discussion if you like.

CopyQuote

Left Quote

“The Pirate Bay has been one of the most important movements in Sweden for freedom of speech, working against corruption and censorship.

Peter Sunde Left Quote

PopularArticles

A selection of some TorrentFreak's classics dug up from our archives.