Originally Posted by AdamD (Post 35425117)

Always wondered how the RIAA etc got away with claiming such figures.

I often wonder about radios, I mean, if I hear a song on a radio and record it, why or how is that any different to downloading it?

Do the record companies lose money by me recording a song from the radio? Doubtful

Given that radio is broadcast across the whole of the UK, that must mean milllllllllllions of pounds are being lost for every song, because potentially, everyone can "download" (record) it and never have to buy the CD! :D

(Yes I know they cut off the start/ending, but you can still get most of the song!)

Originally Posted by danielf (Post 35425129)

Artists get paid for songs played on the radio.

Originally Posted by AdamD (Post 35425139)

Right, so if it's been broadcast to every corner of the UK, but people in the UK are also sharing it via bittorrent, why is that illegal? ;)

Originally Posted by danielf (Post 35425129)

Artists get paid for songs played on the radio.

Originally Posted by _wtf_ (Post 35424846)

None, but it's impossible to do that because of the nature of P2P filesharing. You join a swarm and start uploading as well as downloading.




Nope, downloading copyrighted files found on TPB would get you a civil court case if caught but as mentioned several times there's a lot of files on TPB that are not copyrighted. P2P filesharing has many uses. How about 37GB of free music or maybe you want to watch a movie for free. (Note to mods these are links to noncopyrighted material)

Originally Posted by Skie (Post 35425208)

Most artists will tell you they get very little from these collections agencies. Most of the money just gets funnelled into the industries coffers. And have you seen how much they wanted for internet streaming?

Originally Posted by Chrysalis (Post 35424821)

However is it ok to massage figures to get dodgy laws passed, eg. claiming every download is a lost sale, meaning someone on the dole who has downloaded £1000 woth of content in a week would have obviously otherwise brought that £1000 of content out of their dole?

Originally Posted by carlwaring (Post 35425250)

Of course, if this hypothetical unemployed person didn't have the opportunity to get this content for free, and could not afford to buy it, they would have to do without. Therefore, yes, they are "lost" sales.

Originally Posted by AdamD (Post 35425117)

I often wonder about radios, I mean, if I hear a song on a radio and record it, why or how is that any different to downloading it?

Originally Posted by danielf (Post 35425251)

Errm, no. There wouldn't be a sale if the person couldn't download it for free, so there is no 'lost' sale.

Originally Posted by carlwaring (Post 35425252)

Which is missing the point. If they could not download it they would have to buy it. Or are you trying to claim that people download and watch stuff they wouldn't want to buy?

Originally Posted by Hugh (Post 35425239)

Any evidence to back that statement up "most of the money", since PRS a non-profit organisation?

From the UK Performing Arts website

Originally Posted by danielf (Post 35425256)

Chrysalis's point was that there are people who can't afford to buy content.