Discussion in 'Marketplace Discussions' started by Cherrycherry, Oct 26, 2019.
where does on come up with this stuff? ethical when buying something second hand? really?
I'd suggest you go back to Logic Class before you moved on and tackled Ethics.
I feel no guilt buying a public domain release of a well over 50 year old album from a deceased artist at least as far as ethics go. I'm not at all bothered about paying the artists family. I only feel bad about the crap sources these records are sometimes taken from!
There would be a lot less brick and mortar stores if they outlawed selling used property. If it's a popular album, the artist just has to find a better way to make the album appeal in a new form. Many have done that with remixes, bonus tracks, deluxe editions, SUPER deluxe editions, repressing on vinyl, etc. If it's not that popular, either it's junk or it's rare and you probably will never see a new copy made. What bands are banking off their physical releases anyways? Most groups have always gotten a bad deal and made their money off touring. The industry caught on to that and got themselves involved. At any rate, I'm waiting on Son of Dave Dexter, Jr. to chime in.
I think that purchasing used product reduces waste.
It also takes used copies off the market, encourages purchases of new copies (if available).
I'm not interested in supporting a dead artist's "heirs."
I had to get a job long before my parents died, and neither of them left much of a material nature.
They did instill the value of work and self-reliance into me, though.
Of course not. However, many unethical things are done by those selling a used car.
Is this supposed to be a parody thread to commemorate the 25th anniversary of this non-issue?
The artist has already been paid once. I wish I could be paid again for work I did years ago.
I'll be dropping off a box of CDs and cassettes at a charity shop tomorrow. No doubt I'll have a rummage through their CD rack while I'm there and probably pick up an album or two. Is that ethical enough for you?
The worst thing is when a far lesser talented son overrides his Dad's hugely acclaimed and inventive work, rewriting history just for money, then having his work replace his fathers for availability new, as we have seen in the last two years. I'd rather not give people like that any money.
Unless there is a specific contract describing the compensation chain over the life of an item, this falls into the area of agreed compensation.
The business model for producing, distributing, and selling music is somewhat clear if you look at it from a simplistic point of view.
The artist makes the song.
Someone produces the song for distribution.
The distribution chain gets the song to the dealers.
The dealers offer the music to the customer.
The customer purchases the song.
Part of the agreements of this process include agreed upon compensation to the original artist.
Currently that agreement is a one time, up front, original sale, payment percentage.
Once the customer has legally purchased the song for the agreed price the customer owns that copy of that song.
The customer does not own any other rights to any portion of that song.
The customer also agrees to certain usage stipulations when agreeing to purchase the song in the first place.
For lack of a better explanation any use of that song, other than for personal, private use, is illegal and subject to specified legal agreements...that are onerous to iron out.
One such situation, that is not so difficultis the resale of said customer owned copy.
You purchased the copy, you used the copy within the legal limitations, you can now sell that single copy one time.
Just about any other deviation from that simple chain of events triggers some portion of illegal copyright laws.
One last thing. If you legally sell something you are free to send your version of just compensation, to said artist, if you feel it is the proper thing to do.
I'm also VERY careful not to purchase those white label/promo vinyl records that say "Not For Sale" on
the label. I know it 'hurts' some of my favourite artists like John Coltrane, Jimi Hendrix, Scott Walker,
Gram Parsons etc....LOL.
Send those directly to @Slick Willie ! He will know how to properly dispose of them.
I tend to buy used cds because the first editions are generally uncompressed and unremastered.
I’d say this ethics quandary you’re having is about 20 years too late. The horse is out of the barn.
This interpretation of how intellectual property works fits neither the letter nor the spirit of the law
I buy them, but mostly LP's, and give them a good home. Most of the cd's I buy, which isn't many, I wouldn't buy new. Thing about it, after being on these forums there are certain issues of certain cd's and LP's that I want so a new reissue that has been remastered might not cut it for me.
Any used item purchase of any new commodity potentially takes away from someone. So, if you buy a used car, an auto manufacturer doesn’t get to make and sell you a new car. Same goes for a new house. Too bad, I say. The used market is a fact of life, so artists are going to have to deal with the reality of the real world, and not expect everyone buy new CDs as a means of charity.
Is it unethical for artists and manufacturers to rerelease the same material over and over and over in various iterations, special editions and remasters? It’s a 2 way street I guess.
Yes, leave them for me...
musicians and their agents are always crying poverty...….anyone remember "Home Taping is Killing the Music Industry"?
What ethics? The artist was paid.
Not only do I buy both used & new CDs, I also rip every CD to the computer & burn my own collections/compilations, be it the same artist or various artists. Once the CD is sold, it belongs to the buyer to do with as they wish.
When I collected LPs & 45s, the majority of them were used, & I made my own tapes from them to play in the car. Same difference.
They were purchased, not rented, so I will do what I please with them.
Separate names with a comma.