Pariser believes in a very broad definition of stealing that is echoed by many supporters in the RIAA. She believes that users who buy songs are entitled to one, and only one copy. Burning CDs is just another name for stealing, in her mind. "When an individual makes a copy of a song for himself, I suppose we can say he stole a song." Making "a copy" of a purchased song is just "a nice way of saying 'steals just one copy'."
Another possible avenue of legal action for the RIAA is the pursuit of businesses that play unauthorized music in stores. The Performing Rights Society (PRS), Britain's version of the RIAA, may give the RIAA some possible ideas with its pending litigation. The PRS is suing the Kwik Fit Group, a car repair shop in Edinburgh, for £200,000 in damages. The case revolves around the complaint that Kwik Fit employees brought in personal radios which they played while working on cars, which could be heard by colleagues and customers. The PRS says this amounts to a public "performance" and should have entailed royalties.
How much do I have to pay for hearing that damned whistling “Young Folks” over and over in my head?
Which is a roundabout admission that bands are not the ones being hurt by downloading.
There will be professional musicians in the future, but there will be no record companies. That's why they are being so uncompromising now. They know that any compromise just takes them one step closer to oblivion.
Burning CDs is stealing huh? So if someone were to legally download a song, they have no right to have more than one copy in case something happens to their hard drive? Sorry lady, but after I pay for something it is mine to use how I want as long as I don’t profit from it.