posted on Jan, 3 2003 @ 07:28 AM
You seem to be incapable of understanding the basics of how very wrong you are. An attribute rampant in your digital "nothing-else-matters"
James said: "Sorry, I think they can do without an extra 25$."
This line demonstrates your fundamental lack of knowledge on this subject. Artists get paid royalties on sales, usually a per-item amount ranging from
.50 to 2.5 depending on the terms and length of their contract with the publisher/distributor. Your culture is just as incapable of discerning quality
art (one could argue that much of popular music is not art any more) as it is incapable of understanding that artists should be compensated.
Again you said: "Second, I personally don't see how it's wrong to share music you bought."
Fundamental lack of knowledge again. It's against the law... therefore, wrong. One could argue there are several laws that are wrong, indeed, the
anarchist movement obtains much mileage from such a thought. However, in this case, a law guaranteeing remuneration for valuable intellectual property
is not wrong.
Again James shows us his infantile command of of the subject with: "Wouldn't you say, it should also be illegal to record song's off the radio or
movie's off the TV?" No. The FCC has established that this is legal for personal use. Just as it is legal to make copies of your music CD for
personal use not distribution. Once you distribute a copy, you are breaking the law.
And finally, James shows us lack of command of several attributes of intelligence with his closing statement: "I don't think the law's are very
clear enough yet as to when it's stealing intellectual propertie's." Well, they are very clear, and as I eluded to above, easy to summarize.
Perhaps one more time may help you understand. You can make copies for personal use, but you cannot give those copies to someone else. Does that
If you are unable to discern the quality and value of an art-form, you don't deserve to have it. Part of this equation is the willingness to ensure
the artist is paid for your enjoyment. A concept of simple human courtesy that has eluded you.
And before you attack me for assuming the two names are the same person, I am quite aware of the so-called "controversy" on this site over the two
James names. I, as many others here, do not believe you are two different people. You make the same grammar, syntax, and spelling mistakes over and
over again. If you want to do better at your ruse, one of your personalities should use a spell checker.