Keen to hear from anyone that receives a copyright infringement notice

Forums › New Zealand Broadband › Keen to hear from anyone that receives a copyright infringement notice

1 | ... | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17

3438 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#541108 4-Nov-2011 12:19

StarBlazer: But I could buy the Now 37 album from Marbecks for $31.49! It has 36 tracks on it which equates to 87c per track. Still think $1.99 is a fair price? Even cheaper at CD Wow.

Okay compare it to Rihanna's Loud which only has 11 tracks for $15.99 at CD Wow $1.45 per track - even her new album is $16.99 for 10 tracks $1.69/track.

No, I don't think $1.99 is a fair price - do you? Especially now it's legal to buy an album and convert it to play on whatever device I want to and in whichever format/quality I prefer.

Pretty sure the same bulk buying option exists on iTunes (I don't use it, so don't know for sure). Now That's What I Call Music 36 (the latest one I could find online without having the software, I guess because 37's only just come out) is only $17.99 for the album with 18 tracks, i.e. under $1 per track. Since 37 is 2CD I have no idea what they'll charge but as an idea, Led Zeppelin's Mothership is 2CD/24 tracks and the tracks cost $2.39 but the album costs $21.99 = 92c per track from iTunes!

Rihanna's Loud is $9.99 on iTunes apparently, i.e. 91c per track (the iTunes version has 11 tracks).

So, what's your beef?

Mighty Ape

Shop Mighty Ape for electronics, games, computers books and more (affiliate link).

StarBlazer

961 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#541113 4-Nov-2011 12:36

dakie: The album is cheaper because you are buying in bulk, not per song.

You can buy a 12 pack of beer cheaper than you can buy a bottle.

Some brands of beer are cheaper than others, same with music.

But I'm not comparing different brands of beer [albums]. Why are you defending a faulty business model? So why is there not a discount for buying the whole album on iTunes? We're not talking about a small difference either that same album would cost you $71.64. It was suggested that $1.99 was a fair price - I believe it's not.

dakie: If you break into a brewery and steal the recipe, brew your own beer and give it to your mates, it is still theft. You might not have stolen their beer but you have taken something you are not legally entitled to take.

Your analogy is like me playing the piano and singing, recording it and giving it to my mates - have you seen "Be kind, Rewind"? I wouldn't have many mates - you haven't heard me singing.

What you mean is me borrowing a bottle of beer from someone and using my (hypothetical) copy laser machine and make copies for my personal consumption. It doesn't taste quite the same, but I like it so I buy the case of bottles. And when they release a new beer, I already know I like this brand so I buy it again.

If you stop trying to justify outdated and overpriced models - I will stop making ridiculous comparisons.

As I have said over and over Again - I am not justifying or condoning illegally copying material (whatever format) - I just think they should spend the money changing the business model and not chasing after mums and dads or free WiFi providers to make examples of.

Just read the news about Amazon and their Amazon Prime service - not available here. This is what we need to be getting together and arguing about - not infighting over technicalities of a law that wouldn't need to exist if the alternatives were as easy as what the law is trying to prevent.

Let's stop fighting and start writing to our MP, Amazon, iTunes, Fox, Sky etc etc etc for better alternatives.

Procrastination eventually pays off.

jfanning

437 posts

Ultimate Geek

#541114 4-Nov-2011 12:36

kiwipearls:>Yes but in my post on page 13, I said Itunes does not come in mp3 format for other devices.

It must be a pretty old device that doesn't support AAC files. But if you want mp3 files purchase them from bandit.fm

jfanning

437 posts

Ultimate Geek

#541116 4-Nov-2011 12:38

StarBlazer:

But I could buy the Now 37 album from Marbecks for $31.49! It has 36 tracks on it which equates to 87c per track. Still think $1.99 is a fair price? Even cheaper at CD Wow.

Okay compare it to Rihanna's Loud which only has 11 tracks for $15.99 at CD Wow $1.45 per track - even her new album is $16.99 for 10 tracks $1.69/track.

No, I don't think $1.99 is a fair price - do you? Especially now it's legal to buy an album and convert it to play on whatever device I want to and in whichever format/quality I prefer.

Why do you compare the price of a full album to the price of a single? CD Singles are expensive in relation to the full album, why is this not an issue. iTunes albums are not priced at $1.99 x num tracks

StarBlazer

961 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#541117 4-Nov-2011 12:38

bazzer:
StarBlazer: But I could buy the Now 37 album from Marbecks for $31.49! It has 36 tracks on it which equates to 87c per track. Still think $1.99 is a fair price? Even cheaper at CD Wow.

Okay compare it to Rihanna's Loud which only has 11 tracks for $15.99 at CD Wow $1.45 per track - even her new album is $16.99 for 10 tracks $1.69/track.

No, I don't think $1.99 is a fair price - do you? Especially now it's legal to buy an album and convert it to play on whatever device I want to and in whichever format/quality I prefer.

Pretty sure the same bulk buying option exists on iTunes (I don't use it, so don't know for sure). Now That's What I Call Music 36 (the latest one I could find online without having the software, I guess because 37's only just come out) is only $17.99 for the album with 18 tracks, i.e. under $1 per track. Since 37 is 2CD I have no idea what they'll charge but as an idea, Led Zeppelin's Mothership is 2CD/24 tracks and the tracks cost $2.39 but the album costs $21.99 = 92c per track from iTunes!

Rihanna's Loud is $9.99 on iTunes apparently, i.e. 91c per track (the iTunes version has 11 tracks).

So, what's your beef?

No beef - I asked a question - how much and got an answer. I responded to that answer and the question with a comparison. It's called dialogue.

What's your beef?

Procrastination eventually pays off.

StarBlazer

961 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#541118 4-Nov-2011 12:44

jfanning:
StarBlazer:

But I could buy the Now 37 album from Marbecks for $31.49! It has 36 tracks on it which equates to 87c per track. Still think $1.99 is a fair price? Even cheaper at CD Wow.

Okay compare it to Rihanna's Loud which only has 11 tracks for $15.99 at CD Wow $1.45 per track - even her new album is $16.99 for 10 tracks $1.69/track.

No, I don't think $1.99 is a fair price - do you? Especially now it's legal to buy an album and convert it to play on whatever device I want to and in whichever format/quality I prefer.

Why do you compare the price of a full album to the price of a single? CD Singles are expensive in relation to the full album, why is this not an issue. iTunes albums are not priced at $1.99 x num tracks

I refer the honourable forum member to my question;

StarBlazer: I've never used iTunes don't have any Apple devices - but how much would it cost to download legally an album.

Let's even say a double album such as the "Now That's what I call music 78456" as this is what my kids tend to listen to - how does it compare in price and quality? - genuine question!

As you can see I did not ask to compare singles or tracks - I asked to compare albums. It appears the answer I was give was incorrect or at least incomplete.

NonprayingMantis: Who determines a fair price? You? I think $1.99 per track is pretty good value.

You don't need apple devices to use the itunes store.

I feel my resulting posts were justified.

If it is cheaper to buy from iTunes than from a retailer - then maybe I will open an account.

Procrastination eventually pays off.

bazzer

3438 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#541125 4-Nov-2011 13:05

StarBlazer: No beef - I asked a question - how much and got an answer. I responded to that answer and the question with a comparison. It's called dialogue.

What's your beef?

I must've missed your initial question. I thought your comparison was unjustified. You assert that iTunes is not good value, but you don't actually use it and you didn't take the 2 minutes to google it. You compare album prices with iTunes per track prices and wonder why the maths doesn't add up. Funny that, right? After the info I gave you, do you still think iTunes isn't fairly priced?

As I said, I don't use iTunes either, but I think $1.99 is a pretty fair price for a single track. If I like a song by a band, I probably buy their album so that track costs me a lot more than $1.99. I appreciate a lot of people don't consume music like that, so for them $1.99 would be decent value I'd think. The albums you gave as examples of iTunes being unfairly priced also seem pretty fair and reasonable to me.

Do you still not think that $1.99 is a fair price for a single track? You gave examples where buying a physical album gave you value of about $1.50 per track. Do you think that is fair? Do you think that being able to pick and choose tracks you like rather than buying full albums is worth a premium on that per track price? Genuine questions.

Cymro

283 posts

Ultimate Geek

#541143 4-Nov-2011 13:49

tdgeek:
Cymro: Some interesting comments and good debate in the thread, but I think people are a little hung up over downloading as the percieved offence, when the Rights owner groups are actually sending notices for uploading to other people (and yes, I understand that the two are fundamentally linked in P2P transactions).

It's a minor inaccuracy with the reporting in the media so far, but it does change the tone slightly, especially when you compare theft with copying.

It's not theft of the material involved they are chasing, it's 'theft' of the rights to distribute said material.

I am sure it mentioned downloading and uploading??? It cannot be just uploading??

http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/1994/0143/45.0/DLM345923.html
16 Acts restricted by copyright

(1) The owner of the copyright in a work has the exclusive right to do, in accordance with sections 30 to 34, the following acts in New Zealand:
- (a) to copy the work:
- (b) to issue copies of the work to the public, whether by sale or otherwise:
- (c) to perform the work in public:
- (d) to play the work in public:
- (e) to show the work in public:
- (f) to communicate the work to the public:
- (g) to make an adaptation of the work:
- (h) to do any of the acts referred to in any of paragraphs (a) to (f) in relation to an adaptation of the work:
- (i) to authorise another person to do any of the acts referred to in any of paragraphs (a) to (h).

StarBlazer

961 posts

Ultimate Geek

Trusted

#541151 4-Nov-2011 14:03

bazzer:
StarBlazer: No beef - I asked a question - how much and got an answer. I responded to that answer and the question with a comparison. It's called dialogue.

What's your beef?

I must've missed your initial question. I thought your comparison was unjustified. You assert that iTunes is not good value, but you don't actually use it and you didn't take the 2 minutes to google it. You compare album prices with iTunes per track prices and wonder why the maths doesn't add up. Funny that, right? After the info I gave you, do you still think iTunes isn't fairly priced?

As I said, I don't use iTunes either, but I think $1.99 is a pretty fair price for a single track. If I like a song by a band, I probably buy their album so that track costs me a lot more than $1.99. I appreciate a lot of people don't consume music like that, so for them $1.99 would be decent value I'd think. The albums you gave as examples of iTunes being unfairly priced also seem pretty fair and reasonable to me.

Do you still not think that $1.99 is a fair price for a single track? You gave examples where buying a physical album gave you value of about $1.50 per track. Do you think that is fair? Do you think that being able to pick and choose tracks you like rather than buying full albums is worth a premium on that per track price? Genuine questions.

I don't buy music by the track I tend to buy the album - hence my questions. If the whole album could be bought and download for less money then yes I would possibly open an account with iTunes rather than buying it, but only if I can freely play it on any device.

If it only came in AAC and I had to convert it again to MP3 (losing further quality) then I would probably still buy a physical CD to do with as I see fit. In all honesty, if I were to download an album, the first thing I would do would be to burn it onto a CD (yes jfanning we still have CD players in our house) which costs me in media and time - but I don't have as good a CD as if I'd bought it as a CD. Not to mention my bought CD has a resale value - it might only be $1 or $2.

So in my opinion - $1.99 is a lot for a track when you end up buying multiples from an album - halve it and we might be talking. Maybe I'm too old or too cheap! Which is why I usually buy compilation albums.

Procrastination eventually pays off.

bazzer

3438 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#541158 4-Nov-2011 14:16

StarBlazer:
bazzer: So, what's your beef?

No beef - I asked a question - how much and got an answer. I responded to that answer and the question with a comparison. It's called dialogue.

What's your beef?

P.S. I'm sorry if my final question came off as abrasive. I can see how it might've been misinterpreted that way.

bazzer

3438 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#541160 4-Nov-2011 14:19

StarBlazer: I don't buy music by the track I tend to buy the album - hence my questions. If the whole album could be bought and download for less money then yes I would possibly open an account with iTunes rather than buying it, but only if I can freely play it on any device.

If it only came in AAC and I had to convert it again to MP3 (losing further quality) then I would probably still buy a physical CD to do with as I see fit. In all honesty, if I were to download an album, the first thing I would do would be to burn it onto a CD (yes jfanning we still have CD players in our house) which costs me in media and time - but I don't have as good a CD as if I'd bought it as a CD. Not to mention my bought CD has a resale value - it might only be $1 or $2.

So in my opinion - $1.99 is a lot for a track when you end up buying multiples from an album - halve it and we might be talking. Maybe I'm too old or too cheap! Which is why I usually buy compilation albums.

It's a whole different argument though. If you mostly consume music as albums on a CD, iTunes makes little sense to you, same with me. iTunes (or similar) would have to be really cheap for me to even consider using it as a service, but that doesn't stop me seeing the current model as reasonable and fair, it just doesn't fit my usage.

kiwipearls

431 posts

Ultimate Geek

#541164 4-Nov-2011 14:24

jfanning:
kiwipearls:>Yes but in my post on page 13, I said Itunes does not come in mp3 format for other devices.

It must be a pretty old device that doesn't support AAC files. But if you want mp3 files purchase them from bandit.fm

Brand new phone - was under the assumption that Itunes is in a format you can't play on mobile phones and only for apple products....so maybe I/we was/were wrong.

"In the real world as in dreams, nothing is quite what it seems" - The Book of Counted Sorrows

Senility Guild

stevenz

2800 posts

Uber Geek

#541171 4-Nov-2011 14:38

kiwipearls:
jfanning:
kiwipearls:>Yes but in my post on page 13, I said Itunes does not come in mp3 format for other devices.

It must be a pretty old device that doesn't support AAC files. But if you want mp3 files purchase them from bandit.fm

Brand new phone - was under the assumption that Itunes is in a format you can't play on mobile phones and only for apple products....so maybe I/we was/were wrong.

Supposedly, all music on iTunes is now DRM free, in the states anyway - I can't check if it is in NZ as it's firewalled.

http://support.apple.com/kb/PH1714?viewlocale=en_US

Not sure if they're still offering their 'iTunes Plus" option (256Kbps AAC files instead of whatever the default is/was).

It may be that it's only DRM free in the iTunes plus format - the wording on that page is pretty ambiguous.

It certainly used to be the case (and may still be) that the "regular" iTunes tracks were DRM'd and would only play on one of the 5 Apple devices authorised against your account.

@KnightNZ

nickb800

2699 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#541172 4-Nov-2011 14:45

stevenz:
Supposedly, all music on iTunes is now DRM free, in the states anyway - I can't check if it is in NZ as it's firewalled.

Yep, DRM is all gone now, standard offering is a 256k AAC DRM-free

jfanning

437 posts

Ultimate Geek

#541341 4-Nov-2011 22:20

kiwipearls:

Brand new phone - was under the assumption that Itunes is in a format you can't play on mobile phones and only for apple products....so maybe I/we was/were wrong.

AAC has nothing really to do with Apple other than they use it, it will play on most devices these days, iPods, Android phones, Windows Phones, Nokia Phones (for years and years), PS3, PSP etc etc

1 | ... | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17