$14 to $20 for a music cd is an ecconomic argument to go to the
trouble of downloading. (right or wrong)
When a production cd is $1 downloading is less attractive.
This is an argument to demonstrate the point of ecconomics.
Why are the beatles able to repackage an old songs and have them go to number one?
Consumers are buying the packaging.
Personally I get the impression the music labels are trying to
protect the proverbial buggy whip industry through coercive legislation.
If you want a real world example look at copying vhs movies.
When movies were generally over $50 it was easy to justify copying a vhs tape.
Now VHS movies have dropped in price it is practically cheeper to buy rather than rent.
Especially if you are not in a rush to buy when a movie is first released.
It was not the ridiculous and easily circumvented macrovision protection that stopped copying,
it was ecconomics.
There is more here than simple consumer copying.
This is a royalty fight among comercial users.
Perhaps what is needed it an elimination of the copyright protection paradign of
protect against all infringments or loose all claim.
To the limosine leftist who have discovered capitalism
in this justifiable concern, I say "It's the ecconomy stupid!"
No, that's not correct, at least not according to the law. The copyright law, as it's literally written, permits one personal copy. However, if you were to make 1000 copies and they were in fact for personal use (try proving that), the copyright police aren't going to come and knock down your door.