 |
|
The Amy Harmon and John Schwartz/NYTimes report that people are continuing to file share on P2P networks, despite the threat of lawsuits.
"Law, technology and ethics are not in sync right now," said Senator Norm Coleman, a Minnesota Republican who has called a hearing on the subject for later this month. "I presume these lawsuits are having some impact, but they're not solving the problem."
Soli Shin of Manhattan is not waiting for lawmakers to act. She gave some thought to the ethics of file sharing after hearing of the lawsuits and took her own library of 1,094 songs offline, because she knew they were aimed at people who "share" their music files with others. But she saw no reason to stop getting new music for herself.
"It's really a great convenience," Ms. Shin, 13, said. "If I like what I download maybe I'll buy it."
According to The Times/CBS News poll, adults under 30 are more inclined to consider music sharing over the Internet to be acceptable: 29 percent of them say the practice is acceptable at all times, compared with 9 percent of people older than that.
Note the example of the "adult" under 30 who is choosing to sample music to see she if she wants to buy it or not, and is deciding after some thought to remove her shared files while still maintaining her downloading habits. I would say she is a perfect candidate for the Darknet, and is very much in sync with many of her compatriots who are using P2P networks. Remember, it won't be very long until she is voting in elections, but right now she's voting with her dollars for a new .
... instead of significantly damping enthusiasm for file sharing, the record industry's lawsuits appear to be spurring increasingly sharp debates about how the balance between the rights of copyright holders and those of copyright users should be redefined for a digital age.
I keep hearing these debates all over campus, at every gathering, over a wide political spectrum of friends and colleagues who are everything from Fox news conservative to radical liberals. The music industry really needs to address these fundamental issues over copyright, and their need to control every single unit of content, verses just suing kids for their life savings. The more they sue, the more people question. The RIAA seems to be awaking a beast they don't really want to contend with for the sake of their old business model, that's dead and gone anyway.
This chart on file sharing shows 45% of the people believe sharing content between friends and family is okay: 
damn straight, Mary... Boycott the RIAA with the RIAA radar!
Posted by: joe on September 21, 2003 11:29 AMI really think that there is no problem with downloading or sharing files through kazaa. I can get as much porn as i want!!!
Posted by: Matthew Smith on September 24, 2003 11:41 PMWhat is the difference between downloading music and recording a movie? Nothing!
Posted by: Tammy on October 6, 2003 12:35 PMToo bad the music industry lost so much money when they decided to get greedy and only release albums instead of singles. Now they are desperately trying to get back revenue from so called "theives" who would rather have a single before they decide to spend their hard earned dollars on the whole album. Is this stealing or could this be another case of "big brother" watching us? Will they soon be suing when I record a movie off from HBO, give that copy to my brother who then copies it for himself? Or, if I have a rummage sale and get rid of some of my name brand clothing, is Liz Claiborne going to sue me because the shirt I gave away is lost revenue for her? The recipient of my shirt should have purchased it new so that Liz and the store can make a profit. Are consignments stores now going to be sued for not giving a share of their revenue to the retail stores from where they were originally purchased? Not the same you say? Think of how many name brand clothes are given away or sold for a fraction of what they once cost. The profit goes to the seller and to no one else. These downloaders and sharers are not getting a profit from these downloads, nor should they.
The music industry should go back to selling cd singles(a download for 99 cents that I can listen to a whopping 3 times before it is gone does not count.)
I think file sharing is ok. Its just like recording it from the radio. What's the difference from listening to the music on the radio and downloading it?...NONE!
Posted by: Ash on November 7, 2003 07:47 AMI really do think file sharing is ok, i mean so sorry if the music industry doesnt like it but its only practical for this to happen... y would i pay 15 99 for the new blink 182 cd w/o downloading "Feelin This" first to make sure they dont suck on there new cd. but i dont use it as much as i used to and im carfeul to make sure i dont share what i have with other people. Plus i download alot music that i cant find ne where els without buying a whole album of crap i dont want..for example ill bet none of u have heard of Adagio for Strings by samuel Barber....or LuLu's back in town by the Dave Brubeck Quartet bc thats the kind of stuff i play in jazz band...so newayz thats my argument i just hope i dont get my ass sued off for having a very small few "illeagal files" on my computer.......
Posted by: Ken on November 23, 2003 04:05 PMI think file sharing is okay; I usually buy more CDs because I like what I hear from that artist. Furthermore, it is so hard to find a single anymore, and it royally sucks when you buy a whole CD for one song and the artist bombed the rest of the album (do we all remember O.M.C.?)
Posted by: MIke B on December 13, 2003 07:16 PMi download, i burn, i listen...
the music industry can kiss my A%%
I downlowed so much and i never been chought so fuck me bitch
Posted by: Colin on March 9, 2004 10:57 AM