[visualops]

I never said filesharing wasn't a violation of copyright. The fact is, there will be filesharing of one sort or another, just as people have been trading tapes and making bootleg recordings and the like for years. If the RIAA wants to stay in existance and continue to be profitable, they need to change with the times. Copyright law may well need to change accordingly. Copyright law has become increasingly restrictive, and not to the benefit of the originating artist, but to the benefit of the distributor, such as the recording companies. I doubt the Framers had in mind to protect the production, manufacturing, and distribution monopolies of the RIAA. By maintaining their monopoly, creativity HAS been restricted, as well as the public's access to artists and their music.

[discostu]

But how should they change? How can they change to minimize the effect of illegal file sharing? iTunes isn't the answer, a little digital magic will make those $1 downloads just as easy to illegally copy as a CD. This isn't just like trading tapes because the scope is so much larger, this is no longer 1 guy giving a dozen tapes to is budies in school, it's now one guy giving thousands of copies to people all over the world.

What monopolies? What people commonly refer to as the RIAA is over a dozen different companies that compete with each other and non-RIAA companies in the music marketplace. They work together on some legal and lobbying matters via the RIAA but outside of that it's a competition and nobody has anywhere near a monopoly share.

How has creativity been restricted via the current copyright laws? Cover versions are still easily doable often for free and the rest of the time at a nominal fee even the most subsistance level band can afford. There's plenty of companies selling CDs in music stores that aren't in the RIAA so introducing new music to the marketplace isn't being restricted. It's simply not happening.