OMG, dad, you're so embarrassing! Are you P2P file sharing again? Fathers can now add "file sharing" to the list of things they do to embarrass their teenage children - alongside dancing badly in public. P2P file sharing, which peaked over a decade ago, is now the preserve of middle-aged and older internet users. Research from two separate studies (by Kantar and INCOPRO) for UK Music and the …
Bah, I use public embarrassment as a deterrent. For instance, my daughter knows that her learning to twerk will result in me learning to twerk and then chaperoning all of her school dances. For some reason her interest in learning to twerk evaporated the instant she was made aware of that fact.
Try Streamtuner (Streamripper is built in) and then you may understand why it is much more convenient than anything else. Real radio stations are unusable where I live, so once a year, I let my laptop download about 10 radio stations for a few days. I save that on a memory stick and that is what I listen to in my car for the rest of the year.
I think it's because they mainly listen to music on their mobiles. My niece was always running out of data about 1 week into her month because of watching music vids on Youtube at school and coming home, so I gave her my spotify password.
ps. nope I hadnt heard of stream ripping either and it made me feel old
This post has been deleted by its author
I would have thought it all comes down to the difficulty to acquire legally at a reasonable cost vs the difficulty of pirating. Services like netflix, amazon prime, spotify make it much simpler to say I want to watch/listen to that and I can stream it to my current location. It would be interesting to see what the level of piracy is on music/films available on a streaming service vs those that aren't.
Using a ripper is one thing, file sharing is something else. I use a ripper to store choonz on a streamer that's entirely within my home. This is simply so I can find tracks without having to find the right CD.
The article really needs a link to the original reports as the story seems to have mangled things rather.
OK, found the link to the report but it doesn't mention file-sharing amongst the older generation. So where does this come from?
"Fathers can now add "file sharing" to the list of things they do to embarrass their teenage children - alongside dancing badly in public.
"P2P file sharing, which peaked over a decade ago, is now the preserve of middle-aged and older internet users"
As is often the case, the middle class are keener on music piracy than C2DEs, with 58 per cent admitting to having used a ripper ...
Just because I do rip all the CDs I buy, does not mean that I am "stealing" this music. I've paid for it, and it is entirely up to me how I choose to listen to it.
Besides, it is rather hard to fit a CD into even the largest phablet without seriously compromising the music quality.
And because of Napster, I instantly change away from any station as soon as they start playing anything from Metallica. I have no illusions of "bankrupting" or "getting back" at them this way - it's simply what I'm ever willing to give them until the end of my days; it's solely for my benefit of being free from those bastards, not theirs or anyone else's.
To the best of my knowledge I think my daughter has about 6 tracks saved on her phone, she simply has subscriptions to Spotify or another one and just streams any tracks she wants to listen to from online saved playlists.
She's in her mid teens and has been beaten constantly by the school about not pirating software or media. I've lectured her over and over too, as a serious amateur photographer who makes pocket money from licensing my photos, how would she feel if my hard work was being ripped off and I wasn't being paid for it.
People often see media copyright violation as a victimless crime, those people need to spend time with genuine, hardworking musicians and artists. I don't mean rich megastars or big corps, I mean those at the bottom desperately trying to get a foot on the first rung of a professional career ladder, to really see how we feel about seeing others rip off the work we've spent years and years learning how to produce. Some might change their mind if they met face to face with someone who's seen their work ripped off and sold and not a penny coming back to them.
"People often see media copyright violation as a victimless crime, those people need to spend time with genuine, hardworking musicians and artists. [...] seeing others rip off the work we've spent years and years learning how to produce. [...] someone who's seen their work ripped off and sold and not a penny coming back to them."
It is either work, in which case you should make a contract with someone to pay you for the work, before you start working, just like any other worker does.
Or it is art, created by a desire to express yourself and the inner need to share that expression with other people. Why in the world should people be legally compelled to pay for your self-fulfillment?
And don't get me started on royalties and similar repetitive income without repetetive effort, unless every road builder gets a royalty each time a vehicle or pedestrian passes the street he worked on.
I agree - except there does tend to be one problem.
Most of the content us old farts actually want ISNT available on a licenced stream or for purchase!
I joined Netflix because I was hoping to get some old content I wanted... nah... not available in Australia, so that went into the bin. Online services (here or overseas)? Nah, they dont have it either.
I would be happy to pay for what I want - just not what Foxtel/Netflix/<Insert Corp Here> think I want/are trying to flog. But nearly all the time I cant get it.
I think the last DVD I bought was the Jeeves & Wooster (Fry & Laurie) boxed set - and had to get that in the USA because I couldnt get it anywhere else.....
When I look at my collection of old tapes they include copies of late-night comedies from Radio 4, old repeats of even older shows.... you cant buy these things elsewhere.
Would love the money to go to the original artists but.
1. They are (nearly) all dead.
2. I cant buy the stuff anyway!
As to you and your photos - if I wanted one I would expect (and be happy) to pay you!
Yes, it is free. As long as it is available, that is. As long as your bandwidth limit is unlimited and your Internet connection hasn't fallen over. By all means, re-dowload the same thing over and over if you like. It's not like that has any consequence on global bandwidth.
I take it you've never yet encountered anything you liked on the Internet suddenly disappearing forever ? Friendly warning : it happens. There's even a technical term for it : link rot.
When I find something I like on any page anywhere, I do my best to download it. Saves me the bother of looking it up again later and finding the link gone.
That said, I am over 50 and know how to organize my storage, not just type in search terms. Maybe that does make a difference.
Can I just point out that the statistics quoted do not justify the headline ? As usual.
i.e. If you want to show that one group now forms a larger percentage of users of a service than some other group, then the statistic that shows that is not the answer to the question "Have you ever used a music stream ripping app, website or browser plugin."
If there are stats that justify the headline, the author should quote them.
Streaming stations are restricted in just the same way radio stations are - they have to pay massive fees to broadcast the music, so limit what they broadcast to what gets them the most listeners and hence justifies their advert pricing.
Over time this list gets more and more restricted; until you end up like local radio, where you can hear the same song 7-8 times during a single working day.
Back in the early days of internet radio, you could listen all day, all month sometimes, and not hear the same song twice.
As above, if you want anything that isnt main stream, you have to hunt through the torrents to see what you can find. When I find something I really like, and I have a job (currently not something I can say yes to), I will go out and buy a physical copy; once I bought a singer/songwriters entire back catalogue, 10 years worth of album releases.
I do have some music that I am unable to buy legally; it was illegally ripped to mp3 from a wax cylinder recording made in Africa, a few years before WW1.
For some strange reason, Spotify dont list it.
Modern music is crap**. Kids only listen to a segment to decide whether they like it or not then either move on or continue streaming. The mentality (and the music**) barely support the "old-fashioned" idea of buying a single.
** Yes it is. By listening to a short segment the kids have heard everything the track musically has to offer. Most tracks are made up of a poorly-formed musical idea and do not go anywhere. By comparison (yes, old fart here) pick almost ANY track by The Fall and there are enough musical ideas for 6 modern singles.
But audio - it's so easy to push it through decent grade digital audio interfaces, such that you can end up with a bitwise copy by using what might have been called an analog loophole if we didn't all have such a collection of all digital hardware available makes the job very easy.
So all my life, every cassette tape, CD, DVD etc had an extra "levy" bolted on to their sales price. This presumed-guilty tax was supposedly to help pay for the nefarious effects of them being used for unauthorized recording. We've all been paying extra for media that we didn't actually get.
They want to assume I'm a criminal and proactively fine me for it. Okay, I'm going to get something for the price I've paid. Shame to waste my money.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
