Insipid

And not paying for copyrighted material is stealing. You can call it sharing, you can call it freedom, you can call it peace and love and happiness, but it's still stealing. I say it, the law says it, the courts have said it hundreds of times. It's stealing.

Again, you're misreading the napster decision, the courts did not make it illegal, they deemed napster was a criminal enterprise designed to facilitate illegal activity. Even the napster attorney's stipulated that it's illegal, their argument was entirely a free speech argument. They did not state that it's legal to download copyrighted intellectual property. It's been illegal to record and distribute copyrighted material since long before either of us were born.

Also, it's is illegal to record a song from a friend even if he bought it legally. It's called stealing intellectual property. It's not new law and it certainly wasn't created in the court room, but by congress.

I haven't had a speeding ticket in damn near 20 years, so i believe i do obey posted speed limits. But let's stipulate for a moment that i do speed. When i speed, i CALL it speeding. I don't calling it "going real fast" i don't pretend that the law is some nebulous thing that's too difficult to understand therefore i should not follow it. I might argue that the law is wrong, that 55 miles per hour is too low a speed etc. But i STILL acknowledge that it's speeding and it's illegal. Why you can't acknowledge that stealing intellectual property is theft and illegal is beyond me.

Also, i do not think it's "ok" to speed. I think it's wrong. I might weigh the importance of getting to work on time against the illegallity of the act and the likelihood of my causing someone physical harm and decide to engage in the illegal act anyway, but i still am adult enough to know the act is illegal wrong and to pay the fine if i get caught. I certainly don't sit there and say that because the law is wrong i'm obligated somehow to not follow it and to go whatever speed i want when i want.

Also, no one is "killed" from most crimes. I can't recall anyone being killed from shoplifting, corporate theft, public nudity, perjury, etc. If we judge illegality by ONLY making stuff illegal that's deadly, we'll pretty much have anarchy.

Again, what you did years ago was illegal. The record companies did not make it that way, they just asked the court to enforce the law and they did.

disfigured

Maybe I am misunderstanding the decision.

I was under the impression many moons ago that the recording of material for private use, was legal. As long as I didn't sell it and make a profit from it. At least that's how it was when home recording devices emerged on the market. Yeah I'm old enough to remember that ;-).

Well so it doesn't apply, and my reasons aren't valid.

But same as speeding, since they can't catch me (or the likelihood is so small it's negligible), I'm going to do it.

__________________

lrrp

Maybe it's just me, but the fidelity of the stuff I had downloaded from Itunes isn't as clear or rich as it is on a cd. Seems like they are using a lower bit rate and compromising the quality of the recording. I have a lot of jazz and some classical and you can really tell, sounds like the old time AM radio broadcasts. That alone precludes me from Itunes downloads, I think it's one of many good ways to get product out there, but if I want to listen to AM radio I can do that without Itunes...

Insipid

Thank you.

brian_wilbanks

When was the law enacted and where can I find it?

But you're TAKING the jacket that they COULD have sold to someone else.

I'm not talking about the law.....I'm talking about a philosophical definition of stealing.

In order for me to steal something from you, I have to remove it from your posession.

I will agree that if I DL an album, and then repackage it and sell it....that could be construed as stealing.

But sharing is not stealing. I'll NEVER be convinced otherwise.


Comparing DLing music to killing another human being....nice try...but that's the same analogy that some local cops use to justify drug laws...and it's horseshit when they say it too.

__________________



If you don't like my fire, then don't come around, cuz I'm about to burn one down.

brian_wilbanks

Try to get the FLAC files Much better quality.

__________________



If you don't like my fire, then don't come around, cuz I'm about to burn one down.

michelemichele

I loathe the industry myself, and I know it relatively well. Or maybe it's past tense, a few seem to be smartening up, albeit late in the game.

So you know, boycott that Lars person, Madonna, and every other sleazebag who supported going after college students: that sucked, and I would DL Madonna's new albums with great glee if they were worth the space on my harddrive.

It really bugs me when I get requests for file xfers on YT for particular bands who aren't riding high on the hog the way, say, U2 & R.E.M. are. Those people don't give a crap about the bands, they think they're entitled, and it'd be fun to pretend to be RIAA Police.

__________________
(((start the music)))

michelemichele

I don't have iTunes, but I noticed that with my niece's collection. Then again she can't tell the difference between 320 & 198: I sure can.

Really these guys have to learn to stop screwing the consumer, they keep nailing down the virtual lids on their own coffins.

...But worse: it's the artists who suffer the consequences.

__________________
(((start the music)))

BleedingPinky

RadioHead played a smart move last winter.

michelemichele

NIN did too, comics posted a link here

I really, really wish we could see the real numbers without the industry's spin on this, that & the other thing: I remember when they wanted to ban blank cassettes from retailers. Such wailing & gnashing of teeth back then, O!

__________________
(((start the music)))