TLV wrote:
Well, sarcasm aside. Illegal is illegal. Even if we think it's morally right...
/TLV
Well, that was kinda what I was addressing in my first post. There's morality and there's law, and law comes from government, and government acts under the pressure of industry lobbying groups. How much pressure did the music industry put on government to make music downloads illegal (or kill DAT, or levy a tax on blank cassette tapes)? Then, when someone finally figured out that people would pay for downloads (under the right conditions), the industry shifted its focus elsewhere: now the question is what you can do with the music you pay for. Are you renting the right to listen to it, or do you own it? See details here.
Again, I'm not arguing morality here. But I think we have a right to question these laws, which are such a confused mess because the record companies don't know what they're doing yet, but they have huge lobbying power that I as a consumer don't have. Legally, if all I'm doing is "licensing" the right to listen to a song at my convenience (the Rhapsody model), downloads of records I already own should be free, 'cause I've already paid the license, right?
...and not to belabor the point, but suppose the labels decide to go to region encoding (as in DVDs) for some reason. You can buy the next Japanese NO release, but you won't be able to play it on your CD player. Why should you have rights to a CD that isn't even sold in your country? Or maybe they'll go to "Moviebeam" style distribution, where an Internet connection will log how many times you play your CDs and will cut you off at a certain limit or charge your credit card.