its three little letters your'e missing here, you down with BMI...

 

There is no honour among thief's.

If you wanna use the product, literally follow what most release groups say and don't make money from the release, and if you do? you damn well better buy the legit versions as soon as you possibly can from the money you earned.

I agree with the sentiment of the combination of idea's/playstyles/mixdowns leading to the song's idea being "unique" but in the digital realm it is technically possible to recreate a song (I know it would be hard as hell but it is possible). imo at the minute in legislation this is a super grey area, and has been for a while. Ever since hip hop days with samplers. I wonder how many old samples that arent listed in sample clearance havent been used in big songs even within the 50 year copyright law (for the UK anyway). Even then to this day some people debate about the use of sampled chops used in songs, and how discernible the samples are from the original source material. It seems the law hasnt wholeheartedly caught up with this yet (Im not complaining).

I disagree with the stealing something that can be cloned idea has no harm. What about the developers and the producers whos wage can be dependent on the sales of their produce? Its a potential sale lost if the product is good and used constantly but never purchased.

We live in a world where ideas and design are patented. My next question is who owns a sine wave? If i made a song and somehow blagged my way into a big record deal and just made a song with a single sinewave does that mean every other song somehow copied mine? Could i press charges because someone made a song composed of sinewaves? This is an exaggerated example but demonstrates what the future could hold for this grey area. The same/similiar concept can be applied to nearly anything in the musical realm. Another example could be Addictive Drummer 2. Every drum has an audio signature that can be mimicked, so like i said previously; even if you made something "unique" in the digital realm it can be cloned. Once technology becomes powerful enough it can become questionable about real unique ideas in the musical world. To me as a music maker most things i do are done with intent. Sometimes my process of music making is "random", which is me just altering a bunch of parameters in a synth to create something i enjoy listening to. Does the cheapen the process or make the idea steal-able? It depends on how far you wanna go back.

There was a rhetorical paragraph i saw recently about someone wanting to play some drums and make them unique. so then instead of using drum samples he learned how to play real drums. But he didnt like the drums so he bought each of the components and assembled each drum piece himself but still wasnt satisfied. So he started mining iron and cutting wood, and learned how to cut wood and smelt iron by hand to create all the components. How far back do we go to get the uniqueness in a DAW and how does the DAW affect your workflow or your output/sound? Most music makers arent going to take all of those steps and instead just adhere to a pre-made DAW, and get used to its toolset and its limitations. Obviously im talking mostly in a digital realm but im just trying to highlight the huge grey area when it comes to the whole stealing thing or using something you didnt make or isnt yours arguement.

Also watch this, its not directly related but kind of supports my idea about this topic:

 

not to get off topic, but is are spire and serum really that sought after? I think spire is the 1 I wanted to check out but forgot the name until now.

 

Naaa, there's a difference:
Stealing somebody's work / music / composition defies the copyright law. Say, you'd steal somebody's mind and intellectual property.
Stealing / using warez I think is rather like stealing a car or money... taking something away in order to possess it.

Regarding warez, I personally find, that it's a more comfortable way to TRY a software / plugin however, better than official demos with bloody functional restrictions. You still can / should buy them after getting to know, that it is or does exactly what you want or expected.

 

Using warez software to me isn't stealing, because you use something that in first place developers cannot protect! Don't make parallels with real life situations here, software is differrent thing than for example, cars, etc. Guys who crack and patch all of these products should be credited with proud, becaouse their crack work is also amazing work of art. Maybe sounds silly, but if you make something without solid protection, it's better to release it for free, than bitching because someone shared with the world.

On the other side, after trying warez plugin for a few months I can decide will I buy it and support develeopers. Someone above sad that plugins should be able to stand test of time and if I make enough money out of it and other software, I will have no problems with purchasing it. That's why as a bedroom producer buying software is worst thing that you can spend your money on to.

 

Correct me please if I'm wrong, are you talking about the very recent seemingly never endless thread about the chick singer who "stole" the guys song. If that's where this came from, just give it up now.....PLEASE!!!

 

Im a bit suprised at some of the comments, how can you say it isnt stealing? Are these software devs also companies with copyright? Just because something can be taken doesnt mean it should and if it does, it has an effect on the people who made it. If you made money from using one of their products and you warezed it, dont you think you are harming the developer? I think its fine for the whole "test/demo" period but if you make money from it, it should be the first thing you purchase. Somehow because the medium is digital and not protected its open to take? I just dont think thats a justifiable argument at all. Even companies who have introduced anti piracy mediums have them cracked. Im just saying i would never hold my head high if i made bucks from music and never paid back the devs as soon as it was financially feasible.

 

well give me a free copy and when I get the teen choice award ill hit ya back. promise.

 

Agreed, they are two different terms to describe two different types of theft

Plagiarism is commonly used to describe literary theft...

Definition;

Plagiarism - The act of literary theft (Miriam Webster)

...though it can used as a synonym for any theft of any artistic works...

Never-the-less

If you take or use a person's song and pass it off as your own work, in it's entirety or you re-record the song and try to claim you composed it without crediting the original composer or you include substantial parts of another recording without crediting the original piece and it's copyright owners.. it's commonly known and described in the music business as copyright theft... or infringement.

Definition

Theft - The act of stealing; (Miriam Webster)

 

from plagiarism.org

"In other words, plagiarism is an act of fraud. It involves both stealing someone else's work and lying about it afterward."

i agree with this that plagiarism is worst than stealing. first you steal than you fraud + lie about it after

i am not saying warez is ok or not, i just say that the OP speak of stealing song and claim it is unique work, which is stealing + fraud + lie

we must all draw our own line some where right? why do ppl go to youtube and watch music videos that they do not own the rights to watch, but complain of warez? both are stealing right?

 

I think he/she is in denial, and took offense to your words. That's all. LOL.

 

May I give you an out of context example of how warez can be good for the company that has been "cracked"? Adobe is by far the most recognizable company by anyone, at the point that photo-retouching techniques in general carry the name of one of their products (I'm talking, of course, about Photoshop). This is the industry standard, and will be for as long as they want to. How was that achieved? The first crack, and I'm not shitting you here, is a library that had never been changed... They never went out their way to fix that library and avoid getting stolen... why is that?... because the more people get used to their software, the more demand in the field that software gets, the more studios in the field buy the software...

Now, I'm not saying piracy is a good thing, and indeed is stealing... But as everyone says, and I agree, a pirate is not a customer who got stolen of the buylist; a pirate is a pirate and could (and an impressive amount of us will) be a customer in the future.

Take DeadMou5 for example, He admitted to have used a cracked version of sylenth even after he was already a millionaire, and with top 10 records on the chart. Eventually, he bought it.