Man! I can pretty much see where this is going. Anyone want to get this?

toomuch, on 09 June 2010 - 02:15 AM, said:

you would have a point if you had to download it via a torrent...but that isn't the case.


you are a bit off here really.


yep..I downloaded it for free from a non torrent source.

I purchased the Itunes Pass today.

I will purchase the CD/DVD combo in a few weeks as well.

The Chems lose no money from my downloads as far as I can tell. Shit...I have been telling people about the iTunes pass all day. I probably did more advertising form them in the Atlanta area than any of the advertisements that they paid for.


banning people talking about it sounds like something a corporate figure head would suggest dude...you sound like a BP CEO worried about profits right now instead of a destroyed ecosystem. I know that isn't how you think at all...but it kinda reads that way.

Maboul59, on 08 June 2010 - 06:10 PM, said:

in a legal sense, yes it could be...all depends on the certain painting and artist. your avatar could actually be an illegal use of artwork really...shit, most of the people here have avatars that could be illegal in a technical sense.

intellectual property has an insane amount of gray area.

Tom...

Ed...

Moderator...

Supermoderator...

Kal-El...

Anyone......HELP!

inchemwetrust, on 09 June 2010 - 05:28 AM, said:

Can't we all just share a ham sandwich?

Quite frankly I am sick and tired of the back and forth, and the arguing.

So much time and effort put into justifying their personal revolutions and arguing points - when the time and effort could be better spent talking about this beautiful new music we've been graced with.

Just sayin'. I'll shut up now, as I've got some listening to do, because the music is what I most want to talk with you guys about.

whirlygirl, on 09 June 2010 - 06:53 AM, said:

Think about it though....if all of the listening was done legally, it would only be a few of us who could even talk about it. Onlys us in the US, which I would assume would be the minority at this point?




Come on...ya gotta agree, this is when the legality of it all is just fucking stupid.


Why do we in the US get to get the iTunes pass while others don't? What is the actual reasoning and justification regarding that one? I fail to see how that somehow protects Tom and Ed. To me, it seems like it hurts them more than anything. It allows the Us peeps to have a supply and demand advantage that otherwise wouldn't exist. It almost sets up a defacto black market system in the process.


...but I will be told, it's all about legality and protection. right?

Thank s For Evry one of those answers.
Expesally @ BROTHER

Thanks Folks.

P.s. My sister lives in England and the Album CDDVd is preorderd to me.




.

Maboul59, on 09 June 2010 - 12:20 AM, said:

Don't kid yourself, bands loose out massively because of people downloading and sharing torrents or downloading by any other means. Despite what some wishful thinking fans think very very few people who download the album for free will infact go out and buy it. A handful of die hard fans maybe but that's about it.

I don't understand the second part of your argument at all. First of all you say you will go out and buy it when its out then you say you were forced to download it because you can't buy it?

All this talk by various people here that art should be made for the love of it and for free would all be well and good if we lived in a Marxist Socialist utopia but the fact of the matter is for better or for worse we live under capitalism where people have to make a living. Chemical Brothers records cost a fair amount to record, Chemical Brothers concerts cost a huge amount to stage, Tom and Ed have to make a living and the infrastructure support of the record label has to be finacially paid for. So where exactly does the argument that art should be made for free fit into that?

Toby, on 09 June 2010 - 03:30 PM, said:

Yes. It's hard to understand ?
I can't buy the album because it's not released yet. I'll buy it when it's released.
But I am impatient, so when I found another means to listen to the album, I used it, just because I wanted to enjoy the album.
If I had had the choice between buying the album or downloading the leak, I would have chosen the first option. But I did not have the choice, the only thing I could do to listen to the album at that moment is downloading the leak.

whirlygirl, on 09 June 2010 - 05:53 AM, said:

That's the point Whirly, we haven't all been graced with it It's fine for you with your 51 minutes of pleasure, but the rest of us don't have that, so let us have our moan. We're English remember! It's what we do best

Maboul59, on 09 June 2010 - 07:11 PM, said:

Or you could have chosen not to download the leak and thus not propagated the culture of downloading. You don't walk past a fruit stall and steal an apple without guilt on the condition that you'll go back in a few weeks and take another and actually pay for it. Don't get me wrong I don't want to seem pedantic and I can completely understand you and lots of other fans finding the temptation of downloading the album early far too much to bare (I'm lucky enough to have friends in the music industry so heard the album in its entirety a while ago) but at the same time I find a lot of peoples moral arguments about downloading contradictory and hypocritical. Like I said I personally know a lot of musicians in the music industry both at the most successful end and at the bottom of the ladder who are suffering hugely because of music downloading and everyone assuming they should have music for free. I don't think its fair on any of them.

Toby, on 09 June 2010 - 07:38 PM, said:

That only works if you believe that copying .mp3s is stealing, it's an ongoing arguement. Some people (e.g. myself) use downloading as a way to sample music which is our right. It's our money, so we should know what we're getting for it. Unforuntately, the majority of downloaders do not share the same views but that's life.



I've downloaded the Jap version just for the 2 bonus tracks I wont otherwise get. I think i'm allowed this since I have spent a great load of cash in support on The Brothers throughout the years.

Toby, on 09 June 2010 - 08:38 PM, said:

My point of my rant a while ago on this thread was that the price of an apple in the UK and the price of the same apple in let's say Moldova, is not the same. The difference is rather large. The prices of apples (in this example) are scaled taking the countries wealth in value. However, in the music industry it's not the same. I'm paying the same price that's meant for the UK market just because demand from my country is a lot smaller. If they don't care about attracting me as a customer, than why should i care about supporting the record companies?
Don't get me wrong, i will always support the Chems as much as i can.

Exactly, Chems rock, record companies mostly suck.

wrong topic..

Maboul59, on 10 June 2010 - 01:04 AM, said:

But just remember though without those big horrible record companies there would be no Chemical Brothers. You can't choose to support one and not the other. It takes a hell of a lot of financial investment to get a band like the Chems to where they are and that money doesn't just magically appear from somewhere. And remember for every huge horrible EMI or Sony music label there are dozens of really good smaller ones that sign and do their best to invest in much smaller acts the major labels won't touch. Its these smaller labels which actually suffer the most and music in general desperately needs them.

Of course, Chemical music wouldn't spread so easily if it weren't signed on a big record company, but those big record companies do some things that I can't stand. For example exclusive tracks for some regions or digital only. This is nonsense : they can't complain that people don't buy discs any more if they don't even release the whole album physically for everyone.
And don't forget that big record companies are much more interested in profit than in the musical art. It often makes them do stupid things such as that.

iguanapunk, on 09 June 2010 - 10:09 PM, said:

I can't agree more. I have spent more than 50% of my income in the last 10 yrs on music and related stuff. I own everything the Chemical Brothers have released (almost everything) on various formats. The one time in my life I had to move back with my folks for a short while, my dad completely freaked out on me when he saw me move in with 3 large cartons of CDs. this was many years back.
I download music all the time. I listen to so much new music during some phases in my life (like the last 6 months), that it would be stupid if I try to first source and then buy all music before sampling it. I always take great pains to source the stuff I end up loving and playing again. We all love the Chemical Brothers more than any other band in the world, and that's why we're on this forum. Let's stop moaning about someone leaking the stuff, n some people deciding on that very day that they'd go for it, and take the album on when it comes.
I don't agree with the audio+video being THE experience thingy either - it's again a personal choice. I love music much more than any visuals, and want to connect first with Further always as a piece of music, and then the superbonus great film I can watch once in a while. If I saw the movie the first time, (I feel), I would always remember Further as a film+music experience rather than the pure music experience, which I want and choose.

I also just don't get why suddenly a lot of people here have been making a big deal about what is finally everyone's music. I cannot buy till 14th, but I pick up 2 sets of Further LP + CD+DVD + EV LP to start with. The ones who buy Chemical Brothers music will always buy the music the first chance they can. U need to hear the music on that quality if you're a fan. The folks who pirate and are ok with mp3s will continue to do so. Let's stop judging others, and get back to going stark mad crazy over the music, n talking about our experiences with the music, not how we got it. At least that's the way we used to party all these years on this forum, till five days back.

</rant over>