Metallica and me.

AAAAAAAAAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAH

i say DO it
I have a real sore spot for that band.
Stupid muufhfhfggrraaRRRRRRs!

hell,, send me thier address.
Ill write'em

I have to find it first. They must have a fan club site or something. I'll go look.

I don't care about the band either way, but the issue interests me. I can see both sides, I think, but since I gather the band's point of view isn't well-regarded on this thread, I wonder:

Why is it OK to get a band's music for free? How different is it from just stealing a book that you want? Or, for that matter, a CD?

I'm not trying to pick a fight; I just want to understand the rationale for file sharing. Thanks!

I look at it like this:

Have you ever made a copy of a cd for a friend or recorded the music off the radio when you were little? I have. Is that stealing? How is that different from sharing files over the internet?

Sure, there are people that abuse the system, but I'm not sure I ever downloaded anything that I would have actually purchased if I didn't download it. I still pay for music that I want. I buy a lot from the itunes store although I haven't bought an actual physical cd for some time now.

I also go to the library and check out cds and rip them to my computer. Is that stealing? I'm sure a case could be made that it is but what is the library for then? In essence isn't the library giving out a book to a potential buyer everytime they loan out a book?

The funny thing is, is that Metallica ended up suing their own fans. Fans who bought their cds. Fans who pay $25 for their fanclub. People who pay $150 for their concerts and another $20 more once they get there for a shirt. Doesn't make sense to me.

As a matter of fact I have probably bought music because of file sharing. I check out new bands for free to see what I like and then go buy what ever else I want from itunes. You also sometimes get real bad copies of songs, so I will go buy a good version if I really like the song.

I have done those things, jp, or versions of them. Back in the day, I made cassettes of records I liked and traded with friends. And I recall that the industry was all alarmed about that technology, too.

I guess the reason so much has been made of file sharing is that it's relatively easy to do--making a cassette was labor intensive, relatively speaking. I gather that sales of CDs are way down, and I'm sure there are lots of reasons for that. File sharing is just one of them...

The labor thing might have something to do with it. You actually had to make cassettes in real time where you can burn a cd in a fraction of the time. You can download hundreds of songs at a time depending on your connection speed. CDs are only one part of the music industry though. Concerts, fanclubs, merchandise (remember all the K.I.S.S. stuff on the market?) also add to their revenue.

Jeff Tweedy, the lead singer of Wilco, wants file sharing legal. He has been known to put songs on his web site for download before the new albumn comes out. He, and many other indie bands, look at it like cheap advertising. A quick, efficient way to get your music out there and generate interest. Even larger mainstream bands are on the side of legal file sharing. I remember a few years ago right when napster shut down Dave Mathews posted all of the albumn artwork on his site so that those who found a way to download the albumn could print out and have the insert.

Like anything else, I guess it all depends on the view from where you're standing.