Downloading stuff

[4X4]

OK. We're not allowed to discuss illegal downloading, so let's be careful what we say here. I'm looking to download a few songs, and am willing to pay for them. What sites do you all use?
More importantly, can I sample a song before downloading? There are a fewsongs I like, but I don't know the names of. Anyone know of a place where I can hear the song before downloading and paying?

And another thing. Is it "illegal" to download tv shows? I'm pining for some Seinfeld and some TNG. Anyone know where I can get them? Legally, of course.

Sorry about the fataness of this thread. I know it's been discussed before, but I'm hoping for some newer info. Things change so fast these days.

[nfotiu]

allofmp3.com (alltunes.com) is by far the nicest and easiest way to download music. They charge per MB, and high quality mp3s usually run about 10 cents a song. I think you can preview, not sure though. It is legal, but may be a little immoral (depending on whether you view record companies as the devil.). The pay sites are just too DRM hampered. I can't think of any pay site where you can get high quality files that you can play on an ipod, and make an mp3 cd for your car, for example.

emusic.com is great for drm free music too. Their selection is mainly indie rock, though. And even then, they probably only have about half the bands you'd want. I always try emusic first, and then alltunes, just because the money goes to the artists.

Itunes has recent TV shows. ABC.com streams recent episodes as well. Bit torrent and Usenet are the best sources for finding older things, I'd guess.

[ken0042]

Anybody know of a place like that- where I can ad funds without having to throw $20 at them? I'm just thinking that most of what I want I've already ripped from my CDs, and it's just the odd song. If I wanted to pay $10 for the song, I'd just by the CD used.

[Barnes]

Originally Posted by ken0042

Anybody know of a place like that- where I can ad funds without having to throw $20 at them? I'm just thinking that most of what I want I've already ripped from my CDs, and it's just the odd song. If I wanted to pay $10 for the song, I'd just by the CD used.

Can you re-phrase the question Ken? Im not sure I understand.

TV shows would be kind of a gray area. If you're going to miss a show, you would pvr it or tape it to VHS. Downloading is, in my eyes another method of recording it.

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by Barnes

Can you re-phrase the question Ken? Im not sure I understand.

TV shows would be kind of a gray area. If you're going to miss a show, you would pvr it or tape it to VHS. Downloading is, in my eyes another method of recording it.

Recording it is also illegal if you don't just watch it once and get rid of it I believe. Downloading it to keep it would definitely be illegal. Especially since they are all releasing the seasons of every single show ever known to man on DVD, you can't say you couldn't pick it up at the store.

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by Daradon

Recording it is also illegal if you don't just watch it once and get rid of it I believe. Downloading it to keep it would definitely be illegal. Especially since they are all releasing the seasons of every single show ever known to man on DVD, you can't say you couldn't pick it up at the store.

Copyright holders would love that, but that is not true.

You record something, you can keep it as long as you want. What you cannot do is that little blurb they used to say at the end of HNIC. You cannot rebroadcast, retransmit or display at public exhibition. In other words , if it is for your own use, you can keep it and view it as many times as you like. However every coutry has their own laws, so if 4x4 is in Italy he would need to figure out what the law is over there.

[Hanna Sniper]

There’s no such thing as a high quality mp3.
mp3 are lossy files, whatever you do don’t ever share or burn these onto a disk. If you are using it for your own personal use (mp3 players) but never put them to disk as you’re only adding the to degrading of music quality. If you’re burning to a disk always go with lossless files such as SHN and FLAC.

I can’t believe there are now sites that charge people for mp3’s that can never again be returned to its original quality.

[AC]

Originally Posted by Hanna Sniper

If you’re burning to a disk always go with lossless files such as SHN and FLAC.

How does OGG compare to those two?

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by Hanna Sniper

There’s no such thing as a high quality mp3.
mp3 are lossy files, whatever you do don’t ever share or burn these onto a disk. If you are using it for your own personal use (mp3 players) but never put them to disk as you’re only adding the to degrading of music quality. If you’re burning to a disk always go with lossless files such as SHN and FLAC.

I can’t believe there are now sites that charge people for mp3’s that can never again be returned to its original quality.

Very true, but I know I can't tell the difference between the actual MP3 and the CD (as long as the rip was decent - I use EAC with LAME standard settings; 192 VBR). My musical ear isn't that good so while I may be able to tell that there is a difference, I can't really tell that one is 'better'.

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

Copyright holders would love that, but that is not true.

You record something, you can keep it as long as you want. What you cannot do is that little blurb they used to say at the end of HNIC. You cannot rebroadcast, retransmit or display at public exhibition. In other words , if it is for your own use, you can keep it and view it as many times as you like. However every coutry has their own laws, so if 4x4 is in Italy he would need to figure out what the law is over there.

Well downloading to keep definitely is illegal regardless of media type or format. I'm not sure how a song would be illegal but a television show wouldn't be.

I believe you can keep it for your own use if you have paid for it one time or fashion. You are still not allowed to watch it more than once if you tape it. Remember television broadcasting happened WAY before VCR's. The industry didn't expect the average person to have that power.

MP3's were the same way. There was a licence to listen to the song ONCE (within a 48 hr period or something) for evaluation purposes.

The blurb you are talking about still holds true even if you bought the DVD. You're not allowed to take it to a school or venue and rebroadcast it even if you have paid for it.

As well in the hockey game example you have given, I believe the television station does give you the right to record and (maybe) 'own' it if you like. It's not intellectual property, it's a live event. Television programs do not work the same way. Either way different programs have diffeent rules, it depends on the producer/owner.

Again these are all technicalities. Many of these things have been done for a long long time. Since you could tape off the radio or the TV. However I believe it still is technically illegal.

It's is illegal to possess any intellectual property you have not paid for/do not have a licence for, or that has not been given with the express constent of being free to use. Period. Format does not change this. It's just been a rule that has been flaunted so much, many aren't quite sure of it. And again it's hard to enforce, and the one guy how has a bunch of Seinfeld episodes for his own viewing pleasure isn't much of a concern anyway. The rebroadcasting is what they do get more concerned about for sure.

[Hanna Sniper]

Originally Posted by AnthonyCook

How does OGG compare to those two?

I’m not too familiar with that format, I use strictly wav, flac, and shn files only. Doing a little google on it to try and find you an answer “Being a Container format, ogg can embed third-party codecs (such as DivX, Dirac, XviD, mp3 and others) but usually Ogg is used with the following” so if I’m reading it correctly it’s a file that carries the codec within it so as long as it’s a flac or shn (if it can) then there should be no problem. But I know nothing about ogg files

As for hearing a difference… (different post)

The thing is when you take a wav file and make a mp3 file whenever you try and return it to the wav file again it’s smaller and contains less data then the original file. Now ok, sure someone not listening too hard may not tell a difference when listening to it but what happens is that second source somewhere down the line is once again made into a mp3 and the cycle continues. Maybe even the next person uses less then a 192 VBR). After it’s rounds I’ll guarantee you that you will be hearing the difference of way too much compression and wishy washy sound. Sorry as I don’t mean to come off as a snob about mp3’s or something, they are wonderful things but it is it’s damage I’m worried about. I myself am someone that trade’s and collects Pink Floyd recordings from the late 60’s and up. And as a fan and collect of this music I’m only thankful that the care that was taken to preserve this music, I would hate to think what 30 years of mp3’s would have done to this. I’m really afraid of what is going to happen with todays music mp3 are so commonly traded and accept (and over generations of being re copied into a mp3).

Sorry if I’m off topic from the original question, I’m just baffled how we as consumers be sold an inferior product and then patted on our head like they are doing as a favour.

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by Daradon

Well downloading to keep definitely is illegal regardless of media type or format. I'm not sure how a song would be illegal but a television show wouldn't be.

I believe you can keep it for your own use if you have paid for it one time or fashion. You are still not allowed to watch it more than once if you tape it. Remember television broadcasting happened WAY before VCR's. The industry didn't expect the average person to have that power.

MP3's were the same way. There was a licence to listen to the song ONCE (within a 48 hr period or something) for evaluation purposes.

The blurb you are talking about still holds true even if you bought the DVD. You're not allowed to take it to a school or venue and rebroadcast it even if you have paid for it.

As well in the hockey game example you have given, I believe the television station does give you the right to record and (maybe) 'own' it if you like. It's not intellectual property, it's a live event. Television programs do not work the same way. Either way different programs have diffeent rules, it depends on the producer/owner.

Again these are all technicalities. Many of these things have been done for a long long time. Since you could tape of the radio or the TV. However I believe it still is technically illegal.

It's is illegal to possess any intellectual property you have not paid for/do not have a licence for, or that has not been given with the express constent of being free to use.

BS. Everything you said is pure and utter junk.

Here is the actual text from the Copyright Act:

21. (1) Subject to subsection (2), a broadcaster has a copyright in the communication signals that it broadcasts, consisting of the sole right to do the following in relation to the communication signal or any substantial part thereof:
(a) to fix it,
(b) to reproduce any fixation of it that was made without the broadcaster’s consent,
(c) to authorize another broadcaster to retransmit it to the public simultaneously with its broadcast, and
(d) in the case of a television communication signal, to perform it in a place open to the public on payment of an entrance fee,
and to authorize any act described in paragraph (a), (b) or (d).

You are allowed to copy an MP3 for private use. Period. Downloading is simply copying. There is an ethical issue with regards to downloading a call without any method of paying the artists for the work. That is not a legal issue - the Canadian Court system has already determined that. There is no single listen or single viewing statement anywhere in the Copyright Act.

Recording TV for future use has long been established a fair use. There are no technicalities. The downloading of shows is a grey area because, with the case of music, there is a blank media levy that was introduced years ago and the proceeds of that levy were designated to go to artists to 'repay' for pirated music. No such mechanism exists for TV or Movies and there has been no case law with regards to TV shows.

And Live Events ARE Intellectual Property. Everything on TV or Radio or in the newspaper is Intellectual Property.

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by Hanna Sniper

Sorry if I’m off topic from the original question, I’m just baffled how we as consumers be sound an inferior product and being patted on out head like they are doing as a favour.

There are some people who complain about the loss of fidelity due to the digital storage of CDs and still prefer to listen to analogue LPs. CDs are technically lossy, too, by sheer virtue of converting an analogue input into a digital format.

But you are correct in that re-coding and trancoding results in loss of some of the original sound, similar to the loss of quality with copying a cassette tape.

[Daradon]

Originally Posted by Bobblehead

BS. Everything you said is pure and utter junk.

Here is the actual text from the Copyright Act:


You are allowed to copy an MP3 for private use. Period. Downloading is simply copying. There is an ethical issue with regards to downloading a call without any method of paying the artists for the work. That is not a legal issue - the Canadian Court system has already determined that. There is no single listen or single viewing statement anywhere in the Copyright Act.

Recording TV for future use has long been established a fair use. There are no technicalities. The downloading of shows is a grey area because, with the case of music, there is a blank media levy that was introduced years ago and the proceeds of that levy were designated to go to artists to 'repay' for pirated music. No such mechanism exists for TV or Movies and there has been no case law with regards to TV shows.

And Live Events ARE Intellectual Property. Everything on TV or Radio or in the newspaper is Intellectual Property.

Those are broadcasting rights. The broadcaster has those rights not you. Broadcasting DOES give them the copyright yes, but it doesn't just confer it to everyone who is watching it. The network has those rights. You didn't even read the part you posted to me correctly.

The Broadcaster has PAID for those signals, stations, shows, events whatever, giving them those rights. You have only paid to WATCH the broadcast. Sorry. Re read the act, including the part you posted cause it really just buoys my argument.

[nfotiu]

Originally Posted by Hanna Sniper

There’s no such thing as a high quality mp3.
mp3 are lossy files, whatever you do don’t ever share or burn these onto a disk. If you are using it for your own personal use (mp3 players) but never put them to disk as you’re only adding the to degrading of music quality. If you’re burning to a disk always go with lossless files such as SHN and FLAC.

I can’t believe there are now sites that charge people for mp3’s that can never again be returned to its original quality.

Why do you think people convert mp3s to various different formats once they are mp3s? That really is the beauty of mp3s is that they can be played virtually anywhere. Why even bother with digital music if you are not going to keep them in a format that can be played other places than off a computer?

Who wants to spend the time saving 5000 songs in one format for one purpose and another for another purpose.

Who talked about burning mp3 to audio cds? Don't really know why anyone would do that. burning mp3s to mp3 cds is very useful.

I am pretty picky about my music quality, and have very accurate home speakers, and I can't tell the difference between a 192 lame encoded mp3 vs. CD. I challenge anyone to. I've read audiophile magazines where they can't find anyone who can tell a difference.

Why would anyone pay for mp3s, you ask? Why would anyone pay for copy protected CDs? Why would anyone pay for drm'd digital music? allofmp3 offers a great service where they store all their music at 320 kbs and let you encode using lame to whichever bitrate you like. Definitely worth the nominal charge they charge.

sure at some level of re-encoding quality would suffer, buy who does that?

[ken0042]

Originally Posted by Barnes

Can you re-phrase the question Ken? Im not sure I understand.

What I was looking for was somewhere that sells songs for the 10¢ range like indicated in the above links (near the top), but allows you to top up your account a dollar or two at a time. Those seem to want you to put $20 US towards your account, and assume you want to download 200 songs.

allofmp3.com did give me a 20¢ credit for signing up, so I was able to download the song I needed today for free essentially.

[Bobblehead]

Originally Posted by Daradon

Those are broadcasting rights. The broadcaster has those rights not you. Broadcasting DOES give them the copyright yes, but it doesn't just confer it to everyone who is watching it. The network has those rights. You didn't even read the part you posted to me correctly.

The Broadcaster has PAID for those signals, stations, shows, events whatever, giving them those rights. You have only paid to WATCH the broadcast. Sorry. Re read the act, including the part you posted cause it really just buoys my argument.

There are no references in the copyright act to anything like you state. In regards to music, it explicitly says that you are allowed to copy music (section 80). As I said, with regard to TV Shows, it is a grey area because there hasn't been any case law. It is illegal to rent a movie and copy it.

Unless you can provide proof that It is illegal to watch a show that you have taped more than once, or keep it longer than a specified time, I call BS.

[monkeyman]

I believe here in Canada, we pay for the right to copy music every time we pay for blank media of any type. It was a step taken by the Canadian music industry to receive money, assuming that all of the blank media sold in Canada would be used for storing music. That includes tapes, disks, CD’s and mp3 players. I say download all you want you’ve already paid for the right.

[Hanna Sniper]

Originally Posted by nfotiu

Who talked about burning mp3 to audio cds? Don't really know why anyone would do that. burning mp3s to mp3 cds is very useful.

If you would have read my post you quoted, I never said using them as mp3's and such things like mp3 players.. but my point was that the user should never burn them to back to wav for and audio CD. You think that doesn't happen.

Originally Posted by nfotiu

I am pretty picky about my music quality, and have very accurate home speakers, and I can't tell the difference between a 192 lame encoded mp3 vs. CD. I challenge anyone to. I've read audiophile magazines where they can't find anyone who can tell a difference.

If you're using mp3's at 192 Bit Rate then I don't think you are too picky at all, but thats just me be picky myself.

Originally Posted by nfotiu

Why would anyone pay for mp3s, you ask? Why would anyone pay for copy protected CDs? Why would anyone pay for drm'd digital music? allofmp3 offers a great service where they store all their music at 320 kbs and let you encode using lame to whichever bitrate you like. Definitely worth the nominal charge they charge.

If they offer it to you at 320kb then why are you downgrading it to 192 (if you are, as I'm not sure if the 192 was just brought up as a random number) I've never ordered or bought an mp3 so I really don't know. The whole idea of buying mp3's i just don't understand. Do they atleast offer you an obtion to buy a wav file instead, as I would be intrested in that route.

Originally Posted by nfotiu

sure at some level of re-encoding quality would suffer, buy who does that?

Yes, I'm sure that never happens, but good to hear that it doesn't happen with you.

[Hack&Lube]

I use Yahoo Music Engine
http://ca.music.yahoo.com/

- like itunes but without the Apple crap and it costs $7.00 a month for unlimited songs that stream almost instantly. I've been able to find almost anything, even the rarest indie bands and obscure albums on there...everything but obscure 80s Canadian rock albums though (doh).

You can listen to anything almost instaneously, no download times, again unlimited but only as long as you have the subscription. If you don't subscribe, you can listen to 30 second samples and download all the songs to keep forever for $0.50 - $0.99 depending on the song.

They are 192kbps encoded though.