Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

On Internet Piracy.

116 replies to this topic
RedDagger
  • RedDagger

    Crash test dummy

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 24 Oct 2011
  • United-Kingdom

#61

Posted 13 December 2013 - 05:55 PM

Not to do with whether it is stealing, but I find the excuse some people make in that "if I like it, I will tell my friends and they'll have a bigger audience and more people buying their stuff". They're just shifting the blame away from them, making it the responsibility of their friends to not pirate it - which they probably will.

 

The creator doesn't care how many people are downloading their stuff, they care about how much money they're making. Having a billion pirated downloads isn't as good as a thousand paid downloads. 'Oh but I would pay for it if it's good it's just a demo'. Again, the creator doesn't care how many people 'will' download it or would've if it was a bit better, this really isn't an excuse. 

 

Although it's a bit grey whether piracy is theft (I personally agree that it is, by the points said by others), it isn't good morally. 


Shenmue18
  • Shenmue18

    GTAF's #1 Trevor hater.

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Sep 2009
  • Unknown

#62

Posted 13 December 2013 - 06:23 PM

I do see how piracy can harm content owners, but I'm not convinced about the anti-piracy arguments because there is a double standard involved. You can watch a movie or play a game with all of your friends and nobody will say a thing. You can even borrow disks to as many people as you want. Nobody cares, but when it comes to internet sharing somehow things are different (illegal). I don't understand that.

 

I also think that sharing information should be a right or just like freedom of speech. I wonder what will happen when 3D printers will be able to print fully functioning devices. Will those companies that create 3D printers get sued? Probably.

Because, if I watched a DVD with 3-4 friends, I still bought the movie. The creator is still making a profit. if I upload a movie onto the internet, thousands or millions of people could view it for free and the creators would be losing millions, apposed to just a few dollars from me viewing the movie with friends.


ShadowDog94
  • ShadowDog94

    Gaming since '94

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Nov 2012
  • Ireland

#63

Posted 13 December 2013 - 06:41 PM

Let's just say that seeing this annoying-ass ad all the time made me actually want to commit piracy.

 

  • Ermac. likes this

sivispacem
  • sivispacem

    Absolute Dunkel:Heit

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011
  • United-Kingdom
  • Contribution Award [D&D]
    Contribution Award [General Chat]
    Most Knowledgeable [Vehicles] 2013
    Best Debater 2013, 2012, 2011

#64

Posted 13 December 2013 - 07:13 PM

I'll just leave this here
 
  • friendly luggage likes this

friendly luggage
  • friendly luggage

    Catch a ride!

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 May 2011
  • United-Kingdom

#65

Posted 13 December 2013 - 07:39 PM Edited by illegal_luggage, 13 December 2013 - 07:39 PM.

In some countries people have no other option than to pirate because the game, program, or film they want isn't available to buy or is being sold way above the retail price. However for business or professional use, I would consider it very wrong to use pirated software.

  • Street Mix likes this

Vlynor
  • Vlynor

    Big Homie

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 01 Oct 2013
  • United-States

#66

Posted 13 December 2013 - 07:40 PM

In some countries people have no other option than to pirate because the game, program, or film they want isn't available to buy or is being sold way above the retail price. However for business or professional use, I would consider it very wrong to use pirated software.

 

Does that make it right, though? To pirate something because it's being sold for a price higher than you want to pay for it?


theadmiral
  • theadmiral

    Founder And Opening Batsman: Vinewood Cricket Club

  • The Precinct
  • Joined: 26 Sep 2013
  • Trinidad-and-Tobago

#67

Posted 13 December 2013 - 07:41 PM Edited by theadmiral, 13 December 2013 - 07:41 PM.

In some countries people have no other option than to pirate because the game, program, or film they want isn't available to buy or is being sold way above the retail price. However for business or professional use, I would consider it very wrong to use pirated software.

 

This is actually a really interesting point. Older Japanese games and shows come to mind - Things you cannot buy in the USA or most countries, and are only sold at weird auctions in Japan. What say you to piracy of these items if you do not live in Japan? I can think of no other way to get them.


Criѕtian
  • Criѕtian

    2K14

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2011
  • None

#68

Posted 13 December 2013 - 08:01 PM

The main difference is that if you lend a product to someone, you both generally can't continue to use the product simultaneously. Whereas if you make an .iso image of a program installation disk that you post on the internet you can. Plus you can only "lend"to one person, plus lending something doesn't increase the amount of it in circulation.

In truth they're absolutely nothing alike and I don't understand why anyone would compare them.

You are talking about software, but it doesn't apply for movies and music for example (which can be copied\ripped from the original disk and you won't get arrested for it;it's basically legal). The idea is that (in theory) I can have access to any content legally (or at least not get punished for it) and free.
 
"absolutely nothing alike"? Maybe you've already made up your mind about this subject. I'm not even defending piracy per se, I think that people have the moral obligation to buy something if they like it. I just noticed the logical inconsistencies.


It's legal to make copies of films or music but not to distribute those copies, whether in hard form or via the internet. Just because very few people get arrested or charged with it or are subject to sanctions does not make something practically legal as you seem to imply.

As for whether I've "made up my mind" I think piracy is largely the responsibility of the licence holders for dramatically overcharging for products and using opaque terms of service agreements, stifling competition so they can drive up prices etc etc, but that doesn't mean I'm naive enough to think that lending a mate a film but happening to have a copy backed up is the same as placing the same film on a file-sharing website. It simply isn't and it's logic like that which turns popular opinion away from the somewhat valid point that pirates should be making about the closed and opaque software and entertainment markets.

You didn't get my point. In my example I was talking about giving a movie or music CD to someone to make a copy, not what you said. I don't think anyone was ever fined for something like this and I don't think it will happen because it is impossible to trace what people are doing with those disks. It is basically legal because the police\FBI doesn't care. My point is simply this: sharing in real life is not sanctioned if done under certain circumstances (letting other copy your movies or music CDs for example), but when it happens on the internet it's somehow different. It doesn't make sense because the same mass sharing could happen in real life (as it once used to happen, when people were swapping disks with each other in the '90s) and I don't think the law could intervene because where do you draw the line between borrowing\lending and piracy?
 
That's a good point.
 

I do see how piracy can harm content owners, but I'm not convinced about the anti-piracy arguments because there is a double standard involved. You can watch a movie or play a game with all of your friends and nobody will say a thing. You can even borrow disks to as many people as you want. Nobody cares, but when it comes to internet sharing somehow things are different (illegal). I don't understand that.
 
I also think that sharing information should be a right or just like freedom of speech. I wonder what will happen when 3D printers will be able to print fully functioning devices. Will those companies that create 3D printers get sued? Probably.

Because, if I watched a DVD with 3-4 friends, I still bought the movie. The creator is still making a profit. if I upload a movie onto the internet, thousands or millions of people could view it for free and the creators would be losing millions, apposed to just a few dollars from me viewing the movie with friends.

It's not just friends. You could share it with as many people as you want (provided that the disk doesn't get damaged), as long as you don't distribute copies of the movie you'll be fine (you can let them make a copy of the original disk).

Shenmue18
  • Shenmue18

    GTAF's #1 Trevor hater.

  • Members
  • Joined: 07 Sep 2009
  • Unknown

#69

Posted 13 December 2013 - 08:18 PM

Actually, I'm pretty sure it's against the law for them to copy the DVD, at least in America. Also, the chance of me sharing a DVD with enough people to where the creators are no longer making a profit (keep in mind, DVDs cost the studios much less to create than the cost of purchasing said DVD) is pretty low. I won't likely pass around a DVD more than say 5 times. 


sivispacem
  • sivispacem

    Absolute Dunkel:Heit

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011
  • United-Kingdom
  • Contribution Award [D&D]
    Contribution Award [General Chat]
    Most Knowledgeable [Vehicles] 2013
    Best Debater 2013, 2012, 2011

#70

Posted 13 December 2013 - 08:35 PM

Oh I'm sure that people get given copies of things. I'm also familiar with the tape sharing scene etc. But it's not really comparable because burning a couple of copies of an album for your mates and uploading stuff on file sharing sites so tens of thousands of people to obtain isn't quite the same. True enough it's the same laws in question but I totally understand the distinction crossing a boundary of what is worth enforcing. Take speeding as an example. You won't get pulled over for doing 75 in a 70 but you'll probably do prison time for doing 175, even if you aren't driving dangerously. Hence go after the people who are doing the most significant law breaking and leave the more petty offenders alone.

Criѕtian
  • Criѕtian

    2K14

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2011
  • None

#71

Posted 13 December 2013 - 08:41 PM Edited by Criѕtian, 13 December 2013 - 08:42 PM.

My question is this: if real life sharing became a problem how would the FBI\police enforce laws that would prevent people from doing this? I don't think they could do anything about it unless masses of people would meet in one place to exchange disks, but that's not necessarily how mass sharing would have to happen.


Vlynor
  • Vlynor

    Big Homie

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 01 Oct 2013
  • United-States

#72

Posted 13 December 2013 - 08:53 PM

My question is this: if real life sharing became a problem how would the FBI\police enforce laws that would prevent people from doing this? I don't think they could do anything about it unless masses of people would meet in one place to exchange disks, but that's not necessarily how mass sharing would have to happen.

Again, there's a difference though. You can share it among a certain amount of people, most people who watch DVDs/Blu-Rays/etc. share them among friends, not random strangers. There isn't a stronghold for intellectual property sharing outside of the internet and if there was it'd be much easier to bust. With internet sharing, I can post something on a website and have 100,000 people copy it from me. 


theNGclan
  • theNGclan

    hello b0ss

  • Members
  • Joined: 06 Apr 2011
  • United-States

#73

Posted 13 December 2013 - 09:08 PM

I have a hard drive full of pirated copies of games, but physical legit copies of the same games too (Halo, Call of Duty, Half Life, etc.). I prefer to have a no-cd version certain games.


Myron
  • Myron

    I shot Reagan

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Oct 2013
  • Palestine

#74

Posted 13 December 2013 - 09:10 PM

I have a hard drive full of pirated copies of games, but physical legit copies of the same games too (Halo, Call of Duty, Half Life, etc.). I prefer to have a no-cd version certain games.

You could just download a crack rather than the whole game.


Criѕtian
  • Criѕtian

    2K14

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2011
  • None

#75

Posted 13 December 2013 - 09:47 PM

 

My question is this: if real life sharing became a problem how would the FBI\police enforce laws that would prevent people from doing this? I don't think they could do anything about it unless masses of people would meet in one place to exchange disks, but that's not necessarily how mass sharing would have to happen.

Again, there's a difference though. You can share it among a certain amount of people, most people who watch DVDs/Blu-Rays/etc. share them among friends, not random strangers. There isn't a stronghold for intellectual property sharing outside of the internet and if there was it'd be much easier to bust. With internet sharing, I can post something on a website and have 100,000 people copy it from me. 

 

You could theoretically share it with as many people as you want if copies are involved. I don't think they would necessarily be easier to catch. For example, you could buy a music CD, make a copy of it (for personal use) and give the original disk to someone else. The next person does the same thing and gives the original disk to someone else again and this could go on and on (granted, the disc would become unreadable after a while but a great amount of people could do this). Making copies for personal use is not always illegal, especially not in the case of music, and it shouldn't be. Even if I'm the only one using the disk I should be able to make a copy of it in case it gets damaged and I can't replace it\buy a new one (if it's not on sale anymore).

 

The point I'm trying to make is that there will probably always be ways for piracy to happen and some of these can't really be punishable by law because they interfere with individual rights basically, or at least some of these methods of sharing can't be outlawed. You can't outlaw borrowing\lending or giving stuff away, and you basically can't monitor people making copies for personal use. DRM would be a good way to fight this, but it would probably be more destructive than protective for content owners because people don't like DRM and large amounts of people would probably boycott those companies. I think that there's a paradox here that kinda hints at the idea that sharing should be a right.


sivispacem
  • sivispacem

    Absolute Dunkel:Heit

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011
  • United-Kingdom
  • Contribution Award [D&D]
    Contribution Award [General Chat]
    Most Knowledgeable [Vehicles] 2013
    Best Debater 2013, 2012, 2011

#76

Posted 13 December 2013 - 10:19 PM

DRM hasn't really had any negative impact in the markets in which it has been deployed. The biggest threat to the conventional marketplace is legitimate digital distribution.

Also your example doesn't make any sense. It's totally hypothetical and doesn't really contribute anything to the discussion, mainly because it just doesn't happen.

Criѕtian
  • Criѕtian

    2K14

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2011
  • None

#77

Posted 13 December 2013 - 10:42 PM

I agree with both of those points in the first paragraph. However, DRM is pretty much nonexistent for music CDs and movies too (I think) and a lot of people are used to this idea and they would seek legal non-DRM alternatives. DRM for software is accepted because it has been a thing for some time, and even in this case sometimes people are outraged as a result. Remember the Xbox One reactions which made Microsoft change their policies. The same thing would/could happen if music was suddenly DRM only.

That's no way to refute my argument. Real life sharing does happen, but not on that scale, I agree. I'm saying that it could happen (if the internet wasn't safe anymore for file sharing) and there's not a lot that could be done to stop it. Actually I was wrong about one thing, this probably just proves that (DRM) digital distribution might be the only way to completely outlaw file sharing by avoiding any legal loopholes like the one I illustrated in my previous post.


sivispacem
  • sivispacem

    Absolute Dunkel:Heit

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011
  • United-Kingdom
  • Contribution Award [D&D]
    Contribution Award [General Chat]
    Most Knowledgeable [Vehicles] 2013
    Best Debater 2013, 2012, 2011

#78

Posted 13 December 2013 - 11:21 PM

That's exactly my point though. Your argument is about a hypothetical situation that doesn't actually exist. You're claiming that hypothetically a sharing situation may exist between thousands of people. It's possible but falls foul of my proportionality rebuttal. Such a chain would attract the attention of law enforcement should it ever exist and effectively nullify your argument. If you can produce a single valid real world example to furnish it then I'll happily concede

Street Mix
  • Street Mix

    Boss

  • Members
  • Joined: 30 Mar 2008
  • Canada

#79

Posted 13 December 2013 - 11:29 PM

 

In some countries people have no other option than to pirate because the game, program, or film they want isn't available to buy or is being sold way above the retail price. However for business or professional use, I would consider it very wrong to use pirated software.

 

Does that make it right, though? To pirate something because it's being sold for a price higher than you want to pay for it?

 

Yes, if the price for a game is 1/5 of average salary (in most developing countries) then it's ok to copy it for free instead. Publisher's fault that they are greedy. 

 

1. The best thing happened to internet.
2. No and no.
3. Depends.
4. Sure.


Vlynor
  • Vlynor

    Big Homie

  • Leone Family Mafia
  • Joined: 01 Oct 2013
  • United-States

#80

Posted 13 December 2013 - 11:55 PM

 

 

In some countries people have no other option than to pirate because the game, program, or film they want isn't available to buy or is being sold way above the retail price. However for business or professional use, I would consider it very wrong to use pirated software.

 

Does that make it right, though? To pirate something because it's being sold for a price higher than you want to pay for it?

 

Yes, if the price for a game is 1/5 of average salary (in most developing countries) then it's ok to copy it for free instead. Publisher's fault that they are greedy. 

 

1. The best thing happened to internet.
2. No and no.
3. Depends.
4. Sure.

 

 

If you can't afford something that doesn't give you the right to take it. Or in this case, copy it. You might say it should be legal, but that doesn't make it morally right.


Myron
  • Myron

    I shot Reagan

  • Members
  • Joined: 18 Oct 2013
  • Palestine

#81

Posted 14 December 2013 - 12:00 AM

 

 

 

In some countries people have no other option than to pirate because the game, program, or film they want isn't available to buy or is being sold way above the retail price. However for business or professional use, I would consider it very wrong to use pirated software.

 

Does that make it right, though? To pirate something because it's being sold for a price higher than you want to pay for it?

 

Yes, if the price for a game is 1/5 of average salary (in most developing countries) then it's ok to copy it for free instead. Publisher's fault that they are greedy. 

 

1. The best thing happened to internet.
2. No and no.
3. Depends.
4. Sure.

 

 

If you can't afford something that doesn't give you the right to take it. Or in this case, copy it. You might say it should be legal, but that doesn't make it morally right.

 

Course it does.

 

  • ShadowDog94 likes this

Criѕtian
  • Criѕtian

    2K14

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2011
  • None

#82

Posted 14 December 2013 - 12:04 AM Edited by Criѕtian, 14 December 2013 - 12:07 AM.

I think I will take back what I said about sharing being a right, though in some cases I think piracy is defendable (e.g. when other "legal" means are available (as illustrated in post #75, or if you want to try out a game, etc). I don't fully condone piracy and I was mostly playing devil's advocate because I noticed inconsistencies in the anti-piracy arguments, specifically the one about piracy being theft (it's not always comparable to theft).
 

That's exactly my point though. Your argument is about a hypothetical situation that doesn't actually exist. You're claiming that hypothetically a sharing situation may exist between thousands of people. It's possible but falls foul of my proportionality rebuttal.

Such a chain would attract the attention of law enforcement should it ever exist and effectively nullify your argument. If you can produce a single valid real world example to furnish it then I'll happily concede

It doesn't exist but it is a possible alternative, and as long as it exists in theory it makes the illegality of internet sharing questionable at least to some extent (when it comes to some types of content).

It would indeed attract attention, but in the hypothetical situation I posed in post #75, the more (or really the only) likely outcome would be the introduction of DRM from content owners. AFAIK, you can't get arrested or fined for making copies of albums for personal use and I doubt that it can be made illegal. The same thing can be said about giving disks away. I asked this question before, how do you think this process could be made illegal? I think that this particular method is a legal loophole that's only avoidable with DRM which specifically states that the disc can only be used by one person and one person only.

Street Mix
  • Street Mix

    Boss

  • Members
  • Joined: 30 Mar 2008
  • Canada

#83

Posted 14 December 2013 - 04:34 PM Edited by Street Mix, 14 December 2013 - 04:41 PM.

But wether it is defined as stealing or not- it is still illegal on the same level as driving too fast, punching someone, raping someone or drunk driving.

 

Saying that simple copying media from the internet is equal to raping, hurting people or putting their lives at risk makes you a retarded blind brainwashed douchebag. Unless that was a trolling - still it was failed trolling.

  • ShadowDog94 likes this

sivispacem
  • sivispacem

    Absolute Dunkel:Heit

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011
  • United-Kingdom
  • Contribution Award [D&D]
    Contribution Award [General Chat]
    Most Knowledgeable [Vehicles] 2013
    Best Debater 2013, 2012, 2011

#84

Posted 14 December 2013 - 07:49 PM

It doesn't exist but it is a possible alternative, and as long as it exists in theory it makes the illegality of internet sharing questionable at least to some extent (when it comes to some types of content).

It does nothing to question the illegality of internet sharing. By the same logic you could say that it also makes the illegality of selling fake copies of games from a market stall questionable, but very few people have any interest in defending that. The fact that the particular example would be hard to employ the law in is moot as the letter of the law isn't dependent on the difficulty of application. By the same logic, only around 10% of rapes and serious sexual assaults result in a conviction, so where do you draw the line? "Oh, 90% of rapists are never identified or convicted, so we might as well make rape legal".

Criѕtian
  • Criѕtian

    2K14

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2011
  • None

#85

Posted 14 December 2013 - 08:50 PM Edited by Criѕtian, 14 December 2013 - 08:53 PM.

It does nothing to question the illegality of internet sharing. By the same logic you could say that it also makes the illegality of selling fake copies of games from a market stall questionable, but very few people have any interest in defending that.

 

The fact that the particular example would be hard to employ the law in is moot as the letter of the law isn't dependent on the difficulty of application. By the same logic, only around 10% of rapes and serious sexual assaults result in a conviction, so where do you draw the line? "Oh, 90% of rapists are never identified or convicted, so we might as well make rape legal".

I've changed my initial statement quite a bit and I admit that I was wrong about the extent to which piracy is defendable (after all, I wasn't even arguing for my own sake). I said that the illegality of some forms or instances of piracy is questionable (though I didn't phrase it clearly enough in my last post). Would you agree that downloading a movie or album illegally is not different from borrowing it from a friend? I think that in this instance it is justifiable as long as you have a friend that has the movie\CD. Another justifiable example would be pirating games to try them out or play them before buying (in most\a lot of cases you could buy it and return it if you didn't like it, so it's the same thing again). This was the point I was trying to make from the start (though in a more exaggerated manner), that piracy is not so black and white as people seem to think (it's not always wrong).

 

I never said "make piracy" legal. :lol: I just noticed that there was a contradiction. While I agreed that piracy harms content owners (and arguably this is the best argument against piracy) I also noticed that some forms of sharing are not illegal and couldn't be made so (without a drastic change in the license agreement of that particular product, and I gave the example of introducing strict DRM protection) because it infringes the privacy or rights of the buyer (you can't fine someone for bringing friends over to watch a movie, you also can't do that to someone that makes a copy of an album and gives the disk away to someone else, you just can't unless the license agreement specifically states that you can't allow others to have access to the content - and it doesn't currently).


sivispacem
  • sivispacem

    Absolute Dunkel:Heit

  • Moderator
  • Joined: 14 Feb 2011
  • United-Kingdom
  • Contribution Award [D&D]
    Contribution Award [General Chat]
    Most Knowledgeable [Vehicles] 2013
    Best Debater 2013, 2012, 2011

#86

Posted 14 December 2013 - 09:45 PM

I would argue that downloading a film or album is different from borrowing it, yes. By borrowing it there isn't an additional copy in circulation which hasn't been paid for. It is, in essence, the same as borrowing a film or album off someone and then making a copy of it for yourself. Which is also illegal.


theNGclan
  • theNGclan

    hello b0ss

  • Members
  • Joined: 06 Apr 2011
  • United-States

#87

Posted 14 December 2013 - 10:21 PM

 

I have a hard drive full of pirated copies of games, but physical legit copies of the same games too (Halo, Call of Duty, Half Life, etc.). I prefer to have a no-cd version certain games.

You could just download a crack rather than the whole game.

 

It's easier to keep them for backups for broken files...


Criѕtian
  • Criѕtian

    2K14

  • $outh $ide Hoodz
  • Joined: 26 Nov 2011
  • None

#88

Posted 14 December 2013 - 11:11 PM Edited by Criѕtian, 14 December 2013 - 11:13 PM.

I would argue that downloading a film or album is different from borrowing it, yes. By borrowing it there isn't an additional copy in circulation which hasn't been paid for. It is, in essence, the same as borrowing a film or album off someone and then making a copy of it for yourself. Which is also illegal.

Making copies of movies is illegal indeed (even for personal use it seems), but watching a movie at a friend's house or borrowing it from him isn't. There is no difference between watching the movie with a friend\borrowing it and downloading the movie if you delete the files afterwards. You benefit no more for downloading the movie than you would have from the friend situation. As for making copies of albums, it seems that this is illegal for personal use as well. This is dumb for many reasons. Disks can get damaged (they become less readable over time as well) and you can't expect to always be able to replace them (they will eventually stop producing them). Also, by that logic either my friends or I (or all of us) should be fined if I happen to be playing music when they come to my house.

  • Street Mix likes this

Piggsy pls
  • Piggsy pls

    pls

  • Members
  • Joined: 05 Jan 2013
  • United-States

#89

Posted 15 December 2013 - 12:50 AM

I only download music. Only times I've pirated a game is because I already have it but the CD broke. Not for moral reasons, mind you. I don't really give a f*ck about supporting the creator, unless the item in question is really good, and I want them to make more. Don't like pirating games/movies because usually buying them means they're in better quality. And torrents suck ass.

GrandMaster Smith
  • GrandMaster Smith

  • Members
  • Joined: 02 Apr 2006
  • None

#90

Posted 15 December 2013 - 02:25 AM

I think if an artist is a true artist, whether it be filmmaking or music, their largest priority is having their creations reach as many people as possible and not solely about making money. 

 

Most the artists who voice themselves against piracy are already filthy rich, they're just being greedy. They make music to make money, which in turn makes crappy music which leads to less people willing to actually pay for their material and would rather just get it for free. A lot of money comes in from concerts/merchandise/theatres anyhow. 

 

So sorry Dr. Rapper you can only afford 3 White Albanian tigers instead of 4 for your mansions personal zoo, maybe the million of dollars from your next album that comes out next month will allow you to buy other ridiculous luxuries you don't really need while your fans waddle in poverty or sit in jail for downloading last weeks album.

  • Street Mix likes this




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users