Rips now illegal?

[MajorFubar]

No it becomes no different to a year ago when it was still illegal.

Exactly: 'First there is a mountain, then there is no mountain, then there is'

Absolutely :-D

 

[Al ears]

And we all know what Mr. Young thinks of streaming.

Unless it was his hi-res downloads of course...

They are two quite different things David.

Not really, one's local and one's online but they are both correctly described as streaming.

My understanding is that streamed music is to some sort of device that doesn't actually store it before playing whereas a hires download is just that and needs storage locally before playing . Surely streamed music is never actually stored anywhere on your system so you never actually own it.

I store my music on a NAS and stream it via my Sonos, which doesn't store anything. The location of the storage is frankly irrelevant.

That's my point, you store music therefore you hold that file on something you own. Streaming from some server over the internet is a different matter.

It is and it isn't.

One you pay a recurfiring monthly fee and stream over a WAN. The other you pay up front for ownership and stream over a LAN.

Exactly, the only difference between wan and lan is distance, the protocols are the same.

By your logic Alears, if I upload my own music to Google Play am I streaming or not, it's coming over the internet but I still own the music. The distinction you're trying to make is false, the mechanism is streaming, whether or not you own or store the music yourself is irrelevant.

By it's very definition streaming is music or video accessed in 'real time' rather than downloading a file to watch or listen to later.

However this is pretty irrelevant as what Neil Young was referring to was streamed music in low bitrate quality and had nothing to do with hires downloads.

 

[The_Lhc]

And we all know what Mr. Young thinks of streaming.

Unless it was his hi-res downloads of course...

They are two quite different things David.

?

Not really, one's local and one's online but they are both correctly described as streaming.

My understanding is that streamed music is to some sort of device that doesn't actually store it before playing whereas a hires download is just that and needs storage locally before playing . Surely streamed music is never actually stored anywhere on your system so you never actually own it.

I store my music on a NAS and stream it via my Sonos, which doesn't store anything. The location of the storage is frankly irrelevant.

That's my point, you store music therefore you hold that file on something you own. Streaming from some server over the internet is a different matter.

It is and it isn't.

One you pay a recurfiring monthly fee and stream over a WAN. The other you pay up front for ownership and stream over  a LAN.

Exactly, the only difference between wan and lan is distance, the protocols are the same.

By your logic Alears, if I upload my own music to Google Play am I streaming or not, it's coming over the internet but I still own the music. The distinction you're trying to make is false, the mechanism is streaming, whether or not you own or store the music yourself is irrelevant.

By it's very definition streaming is music or video accessed in 'real time' rather than downloading a file to watch or listen to later.

So when I later listen to my downloaded file I'm not listening to it in real time?

Interesting, I'll inform the physicists, they'll be fascinated by this apparent time travel mechanism...

 

[Al ears]

It's a wonderful definition isn't it. I blame the BBC.