[nina0113]

Too bad the recording industry wasted their efforts trying to hold back technology - if they had been the first ones on to the bandwagon, selling the files themselves, they would have seized market share and held it. Now the culture is used to getting songs for free, and it's way too late to put THAT genie back in the bottle.

[The Old Hoosier]

Now the culture is used to getting songs for free, and it's way too late to put THAT genie back in the bottle.

I disagree. It's a matter of simple economics that no one pays for what they can get for free.

As soon as artists stop writing songs--the logical economic conclusion of this ruling--then people will not be used to getting them for free any more.

Read my lips: no new music.

[coydog]

The music industry's handling of this issue is kind of like hos the Chinese govt. dealt with the SARs thing, ain't it? They didn't get on the problem with the approach that would have worked, now they have to deal with a pandemic. I don't feel sorry for either.

[ScottinSacto]

Exactly right. I think Jimmy Buffet was one of those that did not, and sold his stuff via the web directly for nearly free. He realized that he makes his real money touring. The RIAA and the record lables can pimp their one hit wonder boy/girl bands, but most folks can now get the one "good" song instead of the worthless $19 CD.

[AmericanDave]

I am always buying cd's of artists who's songs I have heard first on mp3. It exposes me to more music that I NEVER would have bought without that free exposure. I just bought 3 albums for (an exorbitant) $45 only one album of wich I used to have on vinyl record. The other two I grew to like from MP3 file sharing. If the music industry wasn't ripping me off with their new cd prices, I wouldn't feel the need to sample music before purchasing, but at $15 pr CD, I have to.