 Should music sharing programs be legal?, Give me your opinion. |
 Mar 29, 2007 - 5:23 PM
|
 
|
 Enthusiast  Joined Jul 14, '03 From Jacksonville, FL Currently Offline Reputation: 2 (100%)  |
I am writing a paper for my music history class, and I just wanted the opinions of my fellow 6gc'ers.
What do you think about music sharing programs, such as Napster, Limewire, etc.? Do you think they should be legal (as in completely free)? And why? Please, only educated replies.  I believe that they shouldn't be legal, because artists and bands work very hard to produce songs, and I don't think it's fair for the public to download an entire album for free. I do believe though, that if certain artists want to allow the public to hear their music free, they can. But artists that do not want their music to be free, should be blocked from the public. What do ya'll think? -------------------- |
 |
Replies
|
Mar 29, 2007 - 9:39 PM
|
|
 Enthusiast Joined Aug 31, '02 From Philadelphia, PA Currently Offline Reputation: 8 (100%) |
QUOTE(Batman722 @ Mar 29, 2007 - 6:39 PM) [snapback]541159[/snapback] music is and should be free. It's sound waves in patterns, that's all. artists make money from touring. That is their job. Not to mention the money they make from merchandising. If artists want to make someone pay for their music, then they shouldn't release it for people to hear. the problem is that it costs money to record, produce, mix and master that music you think should be free. it takes MANY hours of work to create those sound waves and patters . -------------------- 15PSI - 30MPG - Megasquirt Tuned
|
|
Mar 29, 2007 - 10:15 PM
|
|
 Enthusiast Joined Mar 8, '04 From Newport, RI Currently Offline Reputation: 63 (99%) |
QUOTE(lagos @ Mar 29, 2007 - 10:39 PM) [snapback]541246[/snapback] QUOTE(Batman722 @ Mar 29, 2007 - 6:39 PM) [snapback]541159[/snapback] music is and should be free. It's sound waves in patterns, that's all. artists make money from touring. That is their job. Not to mention the money they make from merchandising. If artists want to make someone pay for their music, then they shouldn't release it for people to hear. the problem is that it costs money to record, produce, mix and master that music you think should be free. it takes MANY hours of work to create those sound waves and patters . that's why their producers/labels (record companys) take a large percentage, or should I say give a percentage to the artist 
-------------------- |
Posts in this topic
Jen Should music sharing programs be legal? Mar 29, 2007 - 5:23 PM
96bluevert well it's not legal, to start. but for good re... Mar 29, 2007 - 5:34 PM BlackCelicaGT94 This is a hard subject. Theres so many "ifs... Mar 29, 2007 - 5:35 PM
BloodyStupidDavey QUOTE(BlackCelicaGT94 @ Mar 29, 2007 - 1... Mar 29, 2007 - 6:11 PM Batman722 music is and should be free. It's sound waves ... Mar 29, 2007 - 5:39 PM BloodyStupidDavey QUOTE(Jen @ Mar 29, 2007 - 11:23 PM)... Mar 29, 2007 - 5:59 PM BloodyStupidDavey QUOTE(BloodyStupidDavey @ Mar 29, 2007 ... Mar 29, 2007 - 6:04 PM DSToyo I dont have much background on this, but ill state... Mar 29, 2007 - 7:18 PM cnelson Without limewire, napster, etc... artist wouldn... Mar 29, 2007 - 7:25 PM Davesceli I think that music sharing programs should be lega... Mar 29, 2007 - 7:31 PM Consynx legal for any song older than 1/2 a year. . .
some... Mar 29, 2007 - 7:53 PM x_itchy_b_x music is a hobby, go tour or get a real job and he... Mar 29, 2007 - 8:13 PM jason lets put out an albumn that has 12 songs and a tot... Mar 29, 2007 - 9:01 PM uberschall what kills me is that many of the great classical ... Mar 30, 2007 - 9:03 AM cnelson music is a hobby.. if your good enough people will... Mar 30, 2007 - 9:26 AM |
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
| Lo-Fi Version | Time is now: November 20th, 2025 - 5:22 PM |