As I seem to be having a similar yet different discussion with 4 different people:
While some people seem to think I have a solid view on this, I actually don't. I made the thread because I was interested in how this closure might affect music sales in general (online or otherwise). Instead it's descended into a simpleton's argument of "this is a
bad thing because it's affected me" or "it's a
good thing because it's affected me". I only countered people's arguments because I wanted to stimulate a discussion - it could quite easily have gone the other way. Don't assume that because I counter your point, I have strong views countering it.
While I myself am guilty of the anecdotal example ("this is how I look at it, so I assume everyone else is too!") it's a pretty terrible way of discussing things. I can see both sides of the argument, but that isn't what I care about - it doesn't have to be "i am
pro downloading free music!" or "i am
anti downloading free music!". There
is a grey area, guys
I'm more interested in the repercussions of this. Jakiri has said that the main reasons he liked Oink are:
- It allowed him to listen to music that he otherwise wouldn't have.
- It allowed him to obtain music that is very hard to get elsewhere.
- It provided lossless files.
All interesting reasons - I didn't know Oink did this. I doubt the closure will affect lots of people - all those "popular" artists like Beyonce and Justin Timberlake still have masses of torrents circulating the net.
So what's the impact? Surely there's a niche in the market for a website that can provide what oink was providing, but "legally" and with extras? Maybe people could download poor samples from bands for a reduced cost (10p a track?) which then goes to the artist. If they like it, they can then upgrade it to a FLAC file for another 10-20p.