| Re: Ethics of Downloading Music; what's your take? Well, if you buy it, fair use allowed for someone to convert it to a different format (if they wanted and could) to play it on another platform. This is why software like Roxio came out so if someone wanted to, they could convert tapes to CDs with the software, provided you had the inputs in your stereo system to help you do so, to run the connection to your computer. It was called 'fair use' in part because it's simple: it was 'fair' to the seller, who got his money, and 'fair' to the user, who was able to play it where he wanted, and allowed him to make a backup in case the original failed.
Problem is that there's very little independent confirmation of what is really 'lost' by piracy. As Jesterrace rightly pointed out, if you have no physical product to account for, how do you know when it is stolen, but the file is still there? I realize there must be software to let people know if a file is being 'leeched,' but I've never heard about how accurate it might be. About the only facts we know that is independently confirmed is that since about 1990, the base cost for using the media, recording onto it, including the art slip and packaging cost $1. We also know the big bands under major labels probably get about $1/CD sold. What we don't know is how much is accounted for in terms of paying the graphic artists, the lawyers for contracts, advertising, etc. All we know for sure is DRM strips us of our fair use/portability we once enjoyed, and that the music industry has demonstrated a clear pattern of obfuscation, lies and manipulation to basically maintain the reins over distribution and the monopoly it enjoyed almost unabated. |