Shoutbox

quote:

---

Originally posted by -dt-

quote:

---

Originally posted by rm rulz

quote:

---

Originally posted by -dt-
and then another $5 for legal movies, then another $5 for legal applications.....

---

id be willing to pay $200 for all things on the net to be legal

---

a month? are you insane

---

per year

I would definately pay $5 a month if that rule was incurred, but if you could get away with it like you could right now then i would not bother.

quote:

---

Originally posted by -dt-
and then another $5 for legal movies, then another $5 for legal applications.....

---

Agreed.

The record companies are just greedy bitches, and I think they're only going to get less popular and eventually loose

um... http://www.qtrax.com
http://qtrax.com/whatsonqtrax.html
free legal music

It'd become too complicated, such as, oh you can only download 2 albums worth from our DRM site, or 1 movie a week or something from our website with only older films on from a few companies.

I don't think it's a good idea.
Some people will be charged without ever downloading any music (yes they still exist) and, as said before, if they gets this through, then what's next? Then they will have to do the same for movies, software, games (if that isn't categorised under software) and maybe even more in the future.
Also, who's going to check whether the extra money actually goes to the artists who should receive it? Here in the Netherlands we have something called "Stichting Thuiskopie" which should receive and distribute these kinds of fees (eg. we have a fee on empty cds/dvds/etc, that's why I buy those in germany) but they have been criticised multiple times for keeping too much of the money for themselves.

Besides, I can already download music and movies legally here. Downloading pirated software is illegal, and so is uploading of any of the above, but I'm willing to take that risk.

Doesn't sound like a good idea. Where will the money go to? Probably only organizations like the RIAA and big record labels, while smaller artist are left out.

They are doing almost the same thing here in the Netherlands, but with empty cd's and dvd's. Didn't work either , they have a big bank account with millions of euros and the artists did not get antything.

If it actually went to the ones who made the music, then it would be a good idea. I download very little music though, but instead I'm quite the movie addict - and I wouldn't mind paying a certain fee for downloading movies. But, as I said, only if it went to the right people. I'm not interested in supporting those who did absolutely nothing to create the work of art I download.

It's a good idea but it's one of those fairy tale ideas. You'd technically be paying for loads of albums with just 5 bucks. This would do more damage, though yet again 5 bucks a month is atleast something rather than nothing aaand yet again this possibility means even more people will download music.