LimeWire Music-Sharing Service Set to Close Permanently on December 31st

17

Comments

+ Add a Comment
avatar

bling581

CD's are old news. Digital downloads such as iTunes are the way to go. I have no problem paying for music but I'm not spending the money to buy a CD when most of the time I only like one or two songs off it. I pay $1 per song and everyone is happy.

I think it's crap that artists will release new albums but the radio stations and record companies only promote one or two songs to get you to buy the entire album. There's a lot of songs I really don't even like the first time I hear them but after listening to them over and over on the radio it gets to you. If they want people to buy entire CD's then don't release crap albums or promote all the songs.

avatar

Jims45wow

Re: Copyrights

    I have sympathy for the copyrights of persons and businesses. If someone wants to buy their stuff, cool. No one has the right to get it for free--Or do they?

    When someone ships something you haven't ordered, with the intent of billing you for it later, you don't have to pay for it--Nor may they restrict how you use it, store it, or sell it. It is yours. IF someone electronically ships something to you, without a contract, doesn't that equate to the same thing? (Think radio broadcasts and owner-posted electronic media.)

    I believe David Gerold was right. The paradigm of the entertainment industry is what needs to change. They certainly had their haydays, but they need a new concept.

    Examining the recording industry's history would show that they once used fairly rare (and expensive) recording equipment, protected their labels and distributorships, mastering and tooling and printing productions (for vinyl), and got virtually free advertising and promotion on the radio waves for their very few "hit" artists. When CD players hit the market, they got another boom--For coolness, quality, lower production expense, and remastered older titles. When nerdiness started to be cool, they got another boom because the public wanted device portability. Yes, at this time they suffered lost sales from adolescent thieves, but there was no shortage of people in the CD stores.

    Around the same time, the advent of cable spawned MTV, which created:  Increased musical awareness; competing cable, national, and local, music video shows (even more awareness); and sales, sales, sales. Then the industry changed their paradigm. Perhaps for the varied reasons of, piracy, hippies becoming old and deaf, trying to maximize the sales boost of MTV's golden-years-gone-by, whatever... They focused on promoting shorter term attitude-talent, and less on promoting musical artistry. (Funny, that: People spending their own money tend to be a little choosy.)

    I believe that they missed an incredible opportunity, at that time, being: Music Video Sales, with digital audio copies included. The video production costs would have been higher, with increased demand and competition. It was time for them to take a risk, and they chose their path. It has passed that time, again. Their chosen path seems to be the control of congress, air way, and internet transmissions. I think this is wrong. The free market with sensible, non-restrictive, non-intrusive laws, would provide a solution which results in profits for artists and better (more) choices of entertainment.

    Simlar histories and different variables apply to movie production. (Think of Lucas spending $2 mil. for CG effects on Star Wars, when a dedicated basement nerd could now do a better job on his very affordable desktop.) Also, parallels in, distribution, book publishing, TV programming, etc. Seemingly, where gathering these various industries under a very few corporate banners has not preserved the old business paradigms, buying congress and altering the public sense of freedom, privacy, and free markets, is expected to preserve those paradigms.

    A note to those few corporations:  No business adventure is free and without risk. The founders of your various holdings thought out of the box and invested their personal endeavors and judgement in making their businesses successful. Movie theaters and AM radio were new at one time. Get with the program of progress. Don't pay congress to pave all roads to lead to theaters and record stores. It won't work. Freedom works. (By the way, most of your entertainment productions are little better than 8th grade plays or glee clubs, and far less touching.)

Just my $0.5,

Jim

 

avatar

Jims45wow

edit: was about spam, now gone

avatar

AndyYankee17

I get why napster was shut down, they hosted the illegal files. Lime wire was just a medium people used to aquire illegal files. What's next? going after ISPs, the internet backbone, NIC manufacturers?

avatar

snapple00

The people have spoken. They don't care if artists make money or lose money. Their work should be free for some reason. Theives will stop at nothing to take what they think is owed to them.

If it can be had for free, most people will not buy it. No matter what the quality is. No one cares about anyone but themselves.

avatar

Nimrod

Your post exemplifies the stupidity of people on your side the argument.

 

If it can be had for free, most people will not buy it? If this were true then the music indusrty would have collapsed by now. Nice try any way.

avatar

aviaggio

Um, yes. Your point is? When Katy Perry, Justin Beiber, Britney Spears, Diddy, Pitty, 50 cent, 25 cent, and his big brother 75 cent, Jay-Z, Madonna, Mariah, and the other multi-millionaire artists, along with the multi-millionaire label execs that work for the multi-billion dollar music industry all start running to the poorhouse, you give me a call.

avatar

AndyYankee17

the simple fact is that it's their intellectual property. Just because they are multi-millionaires doesn't make a difference. you can't steal your neighbors car then say because he's richer than you you automatically aquire his property.

avatar

aviaggio

True, but downloading a song track isn't theft. It's not property. It's not a tangible good or product. You can't steal that which doesn't exist.

And it does make all the difference. If you found a wallet with $500 in it and realized it belonged to a millionaire, how likely would you be to return it? What if you instead discovered the owner was a little old lady living on social security?

So yes, it does matter. Life sucks. So I'm supposed to give away my hard earned money so some label exec can buy another mansion, boat, or private jet? Yeah, I don't think so.

Of course, since I wouldn't buy any of it anyway, there really is zero loss involved. At the end of the day the multi-millionaires haven't lost a damned thing.

avatar

pastorbob

You are a perfect example of the situational ethics that permeates our society today. If something belongs to a poor person then it is wrong to steal it but if it belongs to a rich person it's okay to steal from them because they can afford it. That's a load of crap. And when you pay for a song track or a cd you aren't giving away your hard earned money, you are buying a product just like when you go to the grocery store you are buying products. Just because the product is in electronic format does not mean it is not property. Following your logic means I should be able to steal a car from the dealership because when I buy it I am just helping to line the pockets of some corporate exec so he can buy another mansion.

The downfall of Limewrie could not be better news in my book. They are not only guilty of allowing people to share songs illegally, but software as well. Additionally over the last several months I have worked on the computers of several friends that were infested with malware and viruses. The major source of the infections? Corrupted files via Limewire.

So as I said, no great loss.

avatar

aviaggio

You know what I think is a load of crap? How our society allows people who bust their asses just as hard, if not harder than everyone else, to NOT be able to earn a living wage. Y'know, buy a house. Have a family. Put quality food on the table and clothes on our backs, while at the same time others, due to being born into wealth or being in the right place at the right time (with no discernible talent or skills) manage to make more money in a month or a year than I'll make in my entire lifetime.

I'm sorry my ethics don't meet up to your high standards. But I sleep at night just fine, thanks.

And again, I repeat, such analogies are epic fails. Music tracks aren't the same as durable goods. So any time you compare it to things like food or cars you only show your ignorance. But thanks for playing.

avatar

pastorbob

So according to your misguided perception of reality, if I have an idea that I patent but have not yet produced into a product, somebody has the right to steal that idea and use it just because it is not a tangible item? Furthermore, a music track is a product that an artist has created and recorded that in turn helps to support that person and those associated with the marketing and sale of that track.

Calling a duck a goose doesn't make it so. Sorry buddy, but music piracy is theft. As a former employee of a compact disc manufacturing plant that was part of the music industry, I take a very dim view of theft of goods and services of any type be they tangible or not. Especially in light of the fact that said cd plant is now closed and 465 people were put out of work when it closed. Piracy was a factor in that closing. Granted not the only reason but a factor. So I am fully aware of the effects of unemployment and struggling to put food on the table, losing a house, retraining into a new career and working for a fraction of what was formerly earned. I agree with you that life isn't fair and some people just can't get a break. And yes, others do get what they don't earn or deserve. But I fail to see how that justifies stealing and further justifying it by saying "it's not stealing because it's not a tangible product." Or "I'm not hurtiing anybody but rich fat cats."  

 

 

avatar

evolution76

It can not be stopped, shut down site another will pop up.   People have download before naspter (the first falling soldier that was put on trail)  It can not be stopped, unless you are wikileaks, they will shut you down for free speech.   

 

 

Define reality... mine or yours?

avatar

nealtse

Which is why the current movements on net neutrality and site blocking are so important.  If they come through, then the RIAA can strong arm the ISP's into blocking all bittorrent traffic, and placing further controls on how we interact with this resource.

avatar

RUSENSITIVESWEETNESS

When the RIAA forced Napster to close, something better popped up. When they started after Limewire, something a thousand times more damaging to intellectual properties popped up--and became VERY popular.

Yeah, each time they cut off a head, the monster just gets bigger.

Time for a new strategy.

avatar

Derek Fredette

I mean, please...

Here's a bit on the US District Court judge who is presiding over this latest matter:

http://cityfile.com/profiles/kimba-wood

After reading that bit, you should consider that agendas are at work here, but certainly not Lime Wire's. 

avatar

Neufeldt2002

Good luck indeed. The only thing they would be successful at is driving it to harder to track technologies.

Log in to MaximumPC directly or log in using Facebook

Forgot your username or password?
Click here for help.

Login with Facebook
Log in using Facebook to share comments and articles easily with your Facebook feed.