Spanish Judge Rules Personal File Sharing Legal

**yesdachi** · 11-03-2006, 17:10

I think WalMart has a new shoplifting rule that if you steal something worth less than $25 and get caught they will not press charges. One could intemperate that to mean that someone could steal almost any CD and not get in trouble even if caught, maybe the record companies should follow suit, given that WalMart sells more CD’s than any individual label.

**Crazed Rabbit** · 11-03-2006, 18:26

So does buying them.

Sigh, except - DUH - stealing is illegal.

I don't think the lawsuits are the best approach, but I think downloading copyrighted material without paying for it is stealing.

CR

**Ronin** · 11-03-2006, 18:29

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

Sigh, except - DUH - stealing is illegal.

I don't think the lawsuits are the best approach, but I think downloading copyrighted material without paying for it is stealing.

CR

I don´t think ridiculously over-pricing the goods they sell is correct either...

as long as they keep it up so shall I.

**Scurvy** · 11-03-2006, 18:51

they have every right to overprice them, they have to make a profit, and as a business organisation their job is to make the largest profit possible, if consumers were not willing to buy cd's at these prices, then the company would have to lower them (and to an extent this is happening)

that is no way to justify stealing - just because your being ripped off doesnt justify taking it for free

**Lemur** · 11-03-2006, 18:55

I don't know, I'm more conflicted on this issue than I should be. On the one hand, stealing is wrong. Artists who don't get paid won't make more art, and that would be a Bad Thing.

On the other hand, the music industry is probably more corrupt than the boxing industry, and that's saying something. I don't know a single musician who has anything nice to say about the labels or the RIAA. The labels have a decades-long history of ripping off the artists, so anything that starts to take the labels out of the equation can't be wholly bad.

But wholesale theft can't really be the answer. Like I said, I'm conflicted. I know the lawsuits are wrong. And I know that the downloading is wrong. And I love music and musicians. So I would love to see what Tony Blair would call a "third way."

There's plenty of wrong to go around, I guess.

**lars573** · 11-03-2006, 19:39

Actually Lemur any music artist will tell you that, as a general rule, the record label makes money from selling CD's and that they personally make money from touring. So a fair number of artists don't give a flying frack how you get their music, only that you come to their live shows. As what pays their bills is you buying a ticket/paying the cover and buying over priced t-shirts. Why do you think ~~dinosaur~~ classic rock acts tour like hell but don't make new albums?

**Don Corleone** · 11-03-2006, 19:45

You know, Lemur has a valid point. As somebody who makes their living from intellectual property, I have pretty strong feelings on this issue. That being said, you hate to see an industry as blazenly crooked and corrupt as the recording industry be the ones to take advantage of case law. Then again, what is 'ripping artists off'? In semiconductors, for example, the engineers that design a chip and it's supporting hardware rarely see a small fraction of the financial rewards a successful product may generate for the company as a whole. Are we being ripped off? I'd say no, as I entered the agreement fully aware of the potential downside. If the recording industry misrepresents their interests to their artists, then the artist should get themself a good contract attorney and seek justice there. Encouraging their fans to 'screw the label' is not the right answer, lawlessness never is.

**Beirut** · 11-03-2006, 19:51

Originally Posted by lars573

Actually Lemur any music artist will tell you that, as a general rule, the record label makes money from selling CD's and that they personally make money from touring. So a fair number of artists don't give a flying frack how you get their music, only that you come to their live shows. As what pays their bills is you buying a ticket/paying the cover and buying over priced t-shirts. Why do you think ~~dinosaur~~ classic rock acts tour like hell but don't make new albums?

Ain't that the truth.

Lars, isn't it legal do DL music here in Canadaland?

**Ronin** · 11-03-2006, 21:10

Originally Posted by lars573

Actually Lemur any music artist will tell you that, as a general rule, the record label makes money from selling CD's and that they personally make money from touring. So a fair number of artists don't give a flying frack how you get their music, only that you come to their live shows. As what pays their bills is you buying a ticket/paying the cover and buying over priced t-shirts. Why do you think ~~dinosaur~~ classic rock acts tour like hell but don't make new albums?

exactly....if you want to support the artists one goes to the shows and pays for the tickets..

record sales just stuff the pockets of the record companies.

what I find most amusing about this is it seems that copying music has just been invented....ever heard of audio cassetes?....back in the day we all went to our friends houses and made copies of their albuns to tape....but once it becomes digital data flowing over the internet the indistry goes ape-****.....go figure..

**Ironside** · 11-03-2006, 20:53

Originally Posted by Scurvy

they have every right to overprice them, they have to make a profit, and as a business organisation their job is to make the largest profit possible, if consumers were not willing to buy cd's at these prices, then the company would have to lower them (and to an extent this is happening)

that is no way to justify stealing - just because your being ripped off doesnt justify taking it for free

Isn't it in the consumers interest to make sure that they get the best deal possible? So if the buisness is ripping you off and you stumbles on a virtual gold mine... It's not like people will have severe moral problems ripping off companies that overcharges them.

And it's not stealing, it's breaching of copywright laws. Why is it important to seperate them? Because had it been stealing (with that counting that someone is losing something in the process), it wouldn't been a successful phenomena.

IMO, the sueings is more or less the death-spasms (for those who doesn't adapt) for the giants in the music industry who are unwilling to lose thier gold-mine in a changing industry. As file-sharing is here to stay, for better or worse.