|
|
Posted by FatKat on 09/27/10 11:27
Amun wrote:
> "FatKat" <robynari@juno.com> wrote in message
> news:1127355874.925156.176270@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> > Hardly a justification. Being the owner of something means you can not
> > only set the price, but also decide whether to sell or not. If I
> > decide to steal a car, the fact that the owner hadn't put it on the
> > market doesn't change the fact that I've just taken a car that isn't
> > mine. There are many compelling arguments for distinguishing file
> > sharing from theft, but this is not one of them. Also, simply being
> > out of print (thought they had a different term) doens't mean out of
> > circulation - old record stores, individual collectors, E*bay offer a
> > few of the avenues for obtaining hard-to-find music.
> >
> So if someone buys a used record from an old record store or ebay or just
> downloads a copy off the net or gets and mp3 made.
Is that a question? Sounds like you're asking what the difference is
between DL'g an MP3 or just buying it used. Assuming that's what
you're asking. then see above - when you buy an old album, you're
buying what somebody else sold. The seller once bought that copy of
"Kilroy was Here" and now sold it - trading his "license" to listen to
that music for money. There is still one copy of that album in
circulation. DL/UL music is different - the seller probably purchased
the music, but is now churning out copies of it. I doubt that RIAA
would have an issue (a legit one anyway) if people were just ripping
their own music, but P2P proves that this isn't the case.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|