Everyone has an opinion about the matter of file-sharing music but not everyone understands the nature of the industry. Do you think that (often greedy) record executives really care about the economic welfare of the people they purport to represent? Whole industries are created around the wealth of a single artist /band and they all profit to an extent from it. In fact, it's the artist who profits the least from this industry, getting only a small percentage of the actual retail cost of a record. Thus, it's these people who cry the loudest when they think their profits are threatened, and not because they think the artists livelihood is threatened. Thus is is the nature of people, thus is the nature of greed. Copyright protection is NOT an answer. It never has been. Greedy record companies/executives have sought to stop people copying music for as long as I have been collecting it (30 years +). I remember the propaganda in the 70's where the skull and cross bones was used on LP's to denote that home taping was killing music. A similar argument is being used to scaremonger about sharing MP3's. Different medium, same old argument. It never did kill it by the way, but exposed it to a wider audience. Record sales actually went up with the advent of audio tape (at least here in the UK they did). I bought a very expensive CD player some years ago with copyright protection built in. Works so well that it refuses to play quite a lot of pre-recorded CD's. What a con, what a rip-off. There is something insidious in the way software companies install software onto our computers without knowledge or consent. Some here may find that just fine. I, for one, find it disturbing. We need to speak out and expose these people/companies. Awareness is the key, people need to know what is going on so they can do something about it. Someone on this thread hit the nail on the head. _Publicity/exposure is the key._ Music sharing is a wonderful thing, it exposes people to music they would never heard of. An MP3 is an entirely different medium than a wonderfully packaged original CD/LP. People will always buy music if they like what they heard. But they had to hear it in the first place. Even people who make music who influenced by the music they've heard; perhaps they should pay royalties? *snicker* This whole argument is irrelevant and always has been. It's human nature to try before you buy and stupid to fight this natural tendency. Copyright protection is the mentality of those that fear they have something to lose. Some enlightened bands are giving away MP3's of their music, recognizing that exposure is the key. Simple maths; the more people that hear your music, the more people more likely to buy it. Good music will always sell! It's such basic common sense that has got trodden over in the greed/copyright debate. One day, in a more enlightened age, when greed is not the predominant factor, the whole argument of copyright issue will be dead. But until then, those that fear they have most to lose (not even those that made the music) will shout the loudest to protect what others made that enabled them to get rich. Go and figure. Jabberwoc

Jon Kamm wrote:

...

Let me explain: You can buy CDs used off eBay very cheap. Even new releases way below retail price. So the person selling them had to get them at below retail in order to make a profit. Now they are getting their money back + profit. Do you think they are sending little checks to the record companies and record producers?

Here I think you are just assuming things. The reseller can have bought his stuff from legal distribution channels, how can you know. The record companies cannot force you to sell CDs in real shops only. The ebay reseller will do his profit since he does not have expenses for a shop like rent, staff, etc. He could have also bought the goods cheap because he bought them used, the are a lot of real 2nd hand record shops. Absolutely legal and without problem. He might also be selling copies ... which is of course illegal

organism wrote: You could personally fuel an army with the river of bullshit you spew with *such* regularity. And so, by your logic, *nothing* could ever be sold used without the buyer or seller sending a "rights" check off to the original producer? Books? Cars? Movies? Furniture? Houses? Anything?

Dear organism If I buy a car, a house, a piece of furniture and I sell it, then it is no longer around for me to use. If I buy music or movies and sell it. What's to stop me from having made a copy and enjoying the music for free for the rest of my life.

Finally you say it: the one who copies is doing something illegal, not the one selling or buying used stuff. You did not mention that in your first mail. You again are just assuming that everybody who is selling used CDs is making a copy before and thus is a criminal. This is not nice ... especially after you bought quite some used stuff at ebay too, right? /Oliver