quote:
You still seem to be missing the point; that copying is not analagous to borrowing, stealing, or any other action that leaves the original owner without their property, so there's no need to "return" the file. As I've said, if someone could "copy" your car and take that copy, then they wouldn't need to return it as you'd still have the original.
I am not missing your point, I just don't agree with it. Your point is valid to an extent. To equate copying to stealing is going too far I agree and I have kind of warmed to the points you have raised up to mass distribution and doing what you want with an artists music, see my next point.
I don't think your use of cars as an analogy is apt either. Multimedia and music are very unique business models.
quote:
Why should Napster (or who ever) make millions of dollars (or even a dime) distributing (copying) music when the artist who actually produced the music receives nothing ?
Actually they don't. Those services only facilitate the sharing of files between private individuals. They're not actually doing the distribution themselves. As I said earlier, I don't think allowing commercial redistribution would be a good idea.
As far as I could tell and the courts agreed with me, Napster was facilitating the mass distribution of music and it's this part of it which does not sit well with me. It's one thing to share/borrow music within your circle of friends but to mass distribute music across the globe without the consent of the artist or their publisher is something else, I don't know what but it isn't lending/borrowing. It's something more commercial for which Napster made millions and the artists received nowt until the courts forced them to cough up. Surely you must agree there is something morally wrong here ?
quote:
No, I want to stop them being ripped off by putting an end to the recording industry as it currently exists.
The recording industry is (according to them anyway) suffering big time. I don't feel any sympathy towards them. But I don't think it is because of downloading music. It's because the public have finally realised that $15.00 for a CD of 2 good songs and 10 shite songs is a rip off. There's generation out there who just don't buy music. I think the CD killed the record industry (not the music industry) because of greedy pricing.
For me, it's about choice and the two models living side by side, those artists that do want their music freely available on the internet at THEIR discretion and artists that don't want their material mass distributed via the internet. If Insync and Madonna don't want their music freely available, I'M ALL FOR IT !!