When I first heard of Napster, I told a friend of mine that they would be shut down within 9 months. I mean, the basic issue at hand here is simple. If you buy a cd, and then make copies for all of your friends, you are sinply breaking the law. Why should they benefit from your hard earned money, if they want to own it them selves, then they must purchase it. Right? Just like copying computer software. We all know that you cannot just email your buddy a copy of Windows 98, but if you could, it would be illegal. So, what if there was a place you could go to share a copy of a book, that you photocopied you self, and then gave every body there access to your free photo copied book, you would be breaking the law. So, what if you were a poet. And you wanted to tell somebody your peotry, and you gave a guy a copy, and he gave it out to every person in the world, and you got credit for it, but no money, and this is what you did for a living, you would be pissed off, and defend your self viligantly, right? Well that is what they are doing. Defending their art. I say they should sue napster because they are providing a forum in which the intention can be no less than the illegal copying of music. What people are not thinking about or really addressing here is the problem that will occur down the road. If we make it this easy fr people to pirate and share music, then the movie industry is not far behind. And when prices are $50 for a cd and $75 for a movie on DVD, people will look back and say, we let this happen. it is our (The entertainment industry) fault for not protecting the industry from what can certainly bring it to it's knees. People complain about spending $8 for a movie ticket, wait until they pay tripple that for a matinee.
Slashdot Mirror
When I first heard of Napster, I told a friend of mine that they would be shut down within 9 months. I mean, the basic issue at hand here is simple. If you buy a cd, and then make copies for all of your friends, you are sinply breaking the law. Why should they benefit from your hard earned money, if they want to own it them selves, then they must purchase it. Right? Just like copying computer software. We all know that you cannot just email your buddy a copy of Windows 98, but if you could, it would be illegal. So, what if there was a place you could go to share a copy of a book, that you photocopied you self, and then gave every body there access to your free photo copied book, you would be breaking the law. So, what if you were a poet. And you wanted to tell somebody your peotry, and you gave a guy a copy, and he gave it out to every person in the world, and you got credit for it, but no money, and this is what you did for a living, you would be pissed off, and defend your self viligantly, right? Well that is what they are doing. Defending their art. I say they should sue napster because they are providing a forum in which the intention can be no less than the illegal copying of music. What people are not thinking about or really addressing here is the problem that will occur down the road. If we make it this easy fr people to pirate and share music, then the movie industry is not far behind. And when prices are $50 for a cd and $75 for a movie on DVD, people will look back and say, we let this happen. it is our (The entertainment industry) fault for not protecting the industry from what can certainly bring it to it's knees. People complain about spending $8 for a movie ticket, wait until they pay tripple that for a matinee.