...or sometimes it's good to do bad things
I think the Petreley essay was a bit on the love-it-or-leave-it side.
There are people who want to sell stuff and people who want to buy stuff. But the thing is, we are all both of those people. In any buying/selling situation, there are two possible outcomes. 1. both parties are happy or 2. one party has the upperhand for whatever reason and can force the other party to accept its terms. The disadvantaged party may agree to the terms, but he isn't happy about it. This is the situation with the recording industry. Consumer (and artists, for that matter) have been disadvantaged for a long time, and now they have tools to bring the deal back to the bargaining table.
Is Napster stealing? Yeah, kind of... You can argue for the sharing of stuff that belongs to you, but when you're 'sharing' with strangers it seems weak.
Nevertheless, Napster has demonstrated clearly that there's room for new models in this particular buying/selling relationship. I agree with Petreley that it's up to those who feel the deal is raw to come up with the new models. The recording industry, naturally, will continue to protect its upper hand, but it will have to come to the bargaining table eventually. But only because the peasents got their hands on some guns.
Slashdot Mirror
...or sometimes it's good to do bad things
I think the Petreley essay was a bit on the love-it-or-leave-it side.
There are people who want to sell stuff and people who want to buy stuff. But the thing is, we are all both of those people. In any buying/selling situation, there are two possible outcomes. 1. both parties are happy or 2. one party has the upperhand for whatever reason and can force the other party to accept its terms. The disadvantaged party may agree to the terms, but he isn't happy about it. This is the situation with the recording industry. Consumer (and artists, for that matter) have been disadvantaged for a long time, and now they have tools to bring the deal back to the bargaining table.
Is Napster stealing? Yeah, kind of... You can argue for the sharing of stuff that belongs to you, but when you're 'sharing' with strangers it seems weak.
Nevertheless, Napster has demonstrated clearly that there's room for new models in this particular buying/selling relationship. I agree with Petreley that it's up to those who feel the deal is raw to come up with the new models. The recording industry, naturally, will continue to protect its upper hand, but it will have to come to the bargaining table eventually. But only because the peasents got their hands on some guns.