Replies

The "it's stealing" argument might be a tired argument but it is an accurate derivative of an earlier statement "Thou shalt not steal." Care to rationalize your position to the one that made that commandment?

I DO!!! You see VomitComet,

It's futile to think that only the strong survive rules don't apply here. Evolution, kidd; they have to conform to what the majority is doing. It maybe stealing by the old rules-- but things are changing. Just because the United States legislature can't keep up with the what majority of thier constituents want, that's not our fault. And remember-- the internet has no governing body, therefore they have no say in it anyways.

this is intelectual property. The excluse nature of the right is finite in terms. They remake old movies in order to keep the public right to the new version. Mighty Joe Young vs Might Joe Young. Intelectual property rights expire. At common law there were no rights to mere ideas only property. The excusive nature of intelectual property was to produce innovation. There is a public interest to be served with intelectual rights passing into the public domain in time. The problem is that the passing to the public part can now be accomplished in a nanosecond. Will the library of Congress have an online collection of high quality out of copyright works? (not if the RIAA can help it) BUT it would be well within their LEGAL ability to serve the public.

It maybe stealing by the old rules-- but things are changing.

* * * * *** * * *

There is no real need for new rules. You must must must show diminished value. Show me how peniless college students would have purchased these songs. There must be a remedy for the damage shown.

You see VomitComet..

"Vomit Comet" ?

You can't even insult someone properly.

How then do you expect to explain issues, such as theft?

You should be ashamed.. but I doubt you even realize it.

You are pretty pathetic. Call it what you want, rationalize the behavior anyway you want, but like it or not, the copyright laws prohibit the use of another's creative work without that person's consent. Online music swapping is not like a library, because libraries are not-for-profit, educational organizations that buy the books that they then loan out free of charge under the fair use doctrine. Kazaa, Morpheus, Grokster, and similar websites are commercial businesses that are making money by facilitating the unauthorized transfer and use of someone's artistic work. Although the music industry may very well have failed to keep pace with the times and modern technology, that does not give you or anyone else the right to steal the music anymore than it gives you the right to rob a gas station that still uses old fashion pumps, or hack into a computer and steal personal information because the person who owns the computer hasn't kept up the firewall up to date. And while the music industry may be guilty of charging a lot of money for a CD with only one or two hits, that does not give you and your gang of thieves a license to steal the music any more than you would have the right to rob a restuarant because you were served a lousy meal. And just because I don't like you as a person, that doesn't give me the right to beat the crap out of you and steal your wallet.