[Poohbah]

There's been a solution to that issue for decades--and some of the smash-the-RIAA purists here on FR absolutely hate it, because it involved paying a small tax on CD-R/CD-RW media.

[rottweiller_inc]

Let's take this a step further so we're in line with hollywood and recording artists. My first amendment rights are violated if speech, including songs, were not free.

[Mister Magoo]

That's no longer viable. Many people simply download the MP3s and either play them on their computer or stereo. Or transfer them to an IPod. Car stereo are now available as 40 gigabyte hard drives. Soon, you will be able to simply plug in your Ipod into a car stereo and be ready to go.

[rottweiller_inc]

this is especially true since the only way artists are heard of at all is over public owned airwaves..all advertising even is own by the public according to the FCC. Why should artisits profit over a public owned medium?

[palmer]

That's a red herring, I use lots of CD's for backup and would never burn a song onto a CD in playable form (wastes space). I shouldn't have to pay a tax to fatcat record companies, mainly because it's those companies that would benefit, not artists.

[rwfromkansas]

Indeed, it is not "free" to download on Kazaa, Pooh. You need a computer. You need a monthly internet connection. And we already pay taxes galore to the RIAA bastards on CDR media. Because of this, I am going to darn well make up for the money that I have spent.....some of it going to the RIAA tyrants despite not even going to a CD store.

[supercat]

There's been a solution to that issue for decades--and some of the smash-the-RIAA purists here on FR absolutely hate it, because it involved paying a small tax on CD-R/CD-RW media.

There is already such a tax on audio CD's (the only kind that can be used in audio recorders).

To what extent do you think the tax actually goes to the people whose music is being put on those CD's?