Quote:
Study: pirates biggest music buyers. Labels: yeah, right | Ars Technica



Those who download "free" music from P2P networks are more likely to spend …
My 2-cents...

I love how people throw around the word "thieve".

People have gotten' use to getting free media. Youtube, flickr, myspace, etc. Pictures are free, videos are free, and some music is free. Why shouldn't it be? Of course there is premium content, but people have the option (most of the time) to get these premium option if they see fit. Its like either having a mona lisa painting on your wall, or it being a free wallpaper on your desktop.

Downloading music has become so easy and cheap, most sane people would turn to that before anything else. Why? Not because we are immoral, but we are rather lazy and don't want to work to get CDs and rip them or work 1hr @ work to earn 1 CD. If people are presented with an even easier, more efficient, and more satisfying product for a good price, people would be inclined to pay for it. Any true music artist would pay $10 a month to have access to 5 million instant-streaming lossless music files.

I must ask people to think logically and dismiss the idea of morality when it comes to file sharing. I don't know one person who wants to download items because it hurts someone. Not even after the RIAA began suing its costumers. We do it because we are selfish and us geeks beg for innovation that has only come through the internet and P2P sharing.

Many on this forum believe that we have the choice to download music illegally in the same way we choose not to hijack someone's car. Hijacking a car is immoral, but when people trade hijacked cars and bypass the overpriced middle man making 90% of the population happy, when does morality become subjective?
- To add to this idea, when a car is hijacked, someone looses property. When a CD is downloaded, a copy is made; no property is stolen.

Wasn't ripping CDs illegal a couple of years ago? Are downloaders the new generation of thieves? There will always be some sort of media crime... are these always going to be criminals, or innovators? We are having this discussion now about The Pirate Bay: Criminals or Innovators? Napster: Immoral kids, or programmers who wanted to make useful software for the masses?

I do not download music illegally because I love lossless. I also don't buy music because it costs to damn much for me. I would trade CDs with friends for lossless files. Am I a criminal? I believe this is subjective...

BTW, a new study finds music pirates tend to buy more music:
Study: pirates biggest music buyers. Labels: yeah, right - Ars Technica

...of course, there is always an argument of correlation rather than causation, but I can say that downloading music "illegally" has allowed me to find great artists that would never be on the radio or perhaps, never on CD. At times, I gladly give money to these artists.

Correct me if Im wrong, but pirates are people/peoples who create physical manufactured products and distribute them as if they were the same product? This differs from the general fan/"criminal" of music.

Love to hear some opinions...