[timberlandko]

If the quality is so bad, why is the RIAA suing their customers over it?

Quality has nothing to do with it; the crime is making the copyrighted intellectual property freely available for unlicensed distribution - that very simple point seems impossible for some folks to get a grip on. It isn't the music, it isn't the copying, it isn't the listening, its the illegal distribution.

[Chunga]

the crime is making the copyrighted intellectual property freely available for unlicensed distribution - that very simple point seems impossible for some folks to get a grip on. It isn't the music, it isn't the copying, it isn't the listening, its the illegal distribution.

Incorrect. Copying copyrighted music without permission from the copyright holder is against the law.

[killjoy]

It isn't the music, it isn't the copying, it isn't the listening, its the illegal distribution.

The RIAA could have easily embrased Napster six years ago and worked to develop new business models. They didn't. Instead they took a luddite approach and tried to shut everything down. It didn't work and never will. Illegal or not, file sharing is here to stay.