I still think that copying cd's, better so only excerpts, are a good way to give exposure to bands that would not have any. The only people who listen to college radio or public radio where the music we listen to are often already open minded (at least here in Quebec). CD's in Europe are overpriced (often double than prices around here) and difficult to find in Africa. So, if we only discuss about availability of CD's, it is understandable that people copy cd's. Most independant releases sell around here for less than 15$ (if you know where to shop) while major label releases (after the low prices of new releases) round around 19 to 25$. Is it good or bad to copy? We each have our opinions. But one thing is for sure, it is understanble. Blame the people (or the market) that set the prices. About the question of stealing. If we define steeling by taking something from someone who cannot use it anymore, than copying is not stealing. It is illegal though. But I also cross the street when the light is red... It is stealing if I copy a, for example, Zorn cd and say I'm the one who wrote it and play the saxophone and sell it saying so. What about sampling? If the references are indicated, I see no problem. In books, we never critizise anyone who includes a citation when the reference is clearly indicated. Why should it be different with music? Yes, sampling can, in art, replace all original material (Beastie Boys Paul's Boutique, Amon Tobin, etc.). It might be different with scolary books. I would never accept reading a collage of citations and consider it intelligent work. But as for music, why not? References are normal in art. It would be impossible to maintain the idea that music, any music, is 100% original. Do we still consider this stealing?