Well, your off-the-cuff reply does raise some interesting points. I'll try to respond point-by-point to make sure I don't leave you with any questions...

>RUBBISH! We've heard all these points before, >and they've been proved crap.

---Interesting...where have they been proven crap? I've seen things supporting my original post in the New York Times, on CNN, and most recently, in Wired. I don't feel any of these sources to be particularly suspect, nor biased towards either side. Wired, actually, seems to carry plenty of studies (all from RIAA and its affiliates) to the contrary, but whom can you believe? Perhaps, as you mention, it comes down to sheep following the herd. Those who can look outside the box will see there's a vast market for anyone who can accept current (modern!) marketing models and actually market in ways that make sense.



>If it was increasing income - then the artists, >music labels and all those involved in the supply >chain wouldn't be complaining would >they??????????

---Since you seem to claim expertise in logic, surely you know that the above statement is a logical fallacy. Even with its poor punctuation properly corrected, it's clear that the statement doesn't make any sense. The real point is that the record labels are whining about inflated numbers that don't reflect actual pecuniary losses. Are you trying to say that people who listen to music _don't_ go out and buy T-shirts and go to the concerts? I've been on planet earth for a while now, and that seems to be the general trend. And do you think that everyone with a copied mp3 would have paid 12-17 bucks for the CD?
No. It's just not accurate.

>And how can you compare VCR tapes to these >files.. It is a LOSSLESS medium.. ie with video >tapes, cassette tapes etc, quality is reduced >with each copy.

---They're very comparable. The issue of "lossless" is moot because for all intents and purposes, one can listen to a tape (or VHS cassette) as many times as one wishes. Yes, it wears out, but big whoop--I've got tapes I listen to that are 15 years old and they're still good enough for me. CDs wear out too--from getting scratched and from that mold that eats the surface after a decade or two. But big deal. Realistically, people's musical tastes wear out before any of the media does. Unless you're meaning 8-tracks. Those were pretty crummy. Even LPs can be playable decades after they were purchased. So for all intents and purposes it's exactly the same thing.


>ALSO, to enable each COPY it had to be physically >passed, reducing the amount of 'COPIES' possible. > There were no 'instantaneous electronic' means >to COPY the files. (I still fail to see why >everyone calls it sharing).

---Again, see the above point. Your point is just a silly, moot, ridiculous thing to try to argue. Yes, there are a tiny fraction of folks out there so anally audiophilliac that they care about the degredation of each pass on the player. But aren't those the same folks that already went out and bought the CDs the second they came out? Aren't they also the ones who play the CDs anyway because computer speakers haven't yet matched regular audio quality? The vast majority of folks couldn't care less about the slight quality difference.


>I'm sure you read all these points in some >pro-copying forum such as this one and just >decided to simply follow and believe them like a >sheep.. perhaps a touch more research and logical >thinking is in order??

---Good advice. Too bad that it's again completely inapplicable. I've gotten my information from a variety of sources, biased and non. I am a professor at a major university, and I also happen to have been a songwriter, and I currently write for a number of different print and web-based publications. I've been on the radio, and I have a very solid understanding of the issues that does not come copied out of some pro-Gnutella forum. I also don't have my head up the brown orifice of the RIAA, as you seem to. I can also spell and punctuate properly, and I'm confident that my logical skills are quite ample to participate in this forum. You, on the other hand, might want to take a remedial writing course, and refresh your critical thinking skills. I also would like to say that, while I support the copying (fine with me to call it that) of mp3s, I _don't_ do it personally. There are just 2 mp3s on my "shared" folder, both downloaded to test the technology. I support the technology because of its incredible alternative means to publish information, to reach audiences, and to share video, songs, and lyrics without having to bend over and take whatever the RIAA chooses to put up your ***. It is discraceful that we allow small, close-minded individuals to shut down a technology that offers far more than the ability to pirate copyrighted music. By your logic, you'd argue that the right of Free Speech should be removed because people use swear words or offend people from time to time. This decentralized file-sharing technology eliminates the need for a middle-man, yes, and until the middle man works out a new way to profit, they'll be upset. That's why the RIAA wants to get rid of it. Artists, songwriters, and writers should be embracing this technology--This is not a threat to artists. File-sharing is only a threat to those who, not unlike leeches, attach themselves to an artist in exchange for publicity and market-share. The RIAA didn't even initially want to return online playing royalties to the artists themselves. That's so transparent and hypocritical that I'm amazed even someone like yourself hasn't seen the light. (Of course, you seem to be hypocritical anyway, since you download mp3s but are all holier-than-thou to others about it).

Last point: Along with lots of gratuitous capitalizations, you seem to like bringing sheep into each post. Perhaps that points to other, deeper frustrations? Was there a bad experience in childhood involving sheep and file-"shearing"?

No, seriously, (had to get the pun in there somehow!) I understand the concern that people don't think carefully about an opinion before blabbing it out on a forum. But in this case, it's a very carefully thought-out and well- researched opinion that (really!) seeks to find a win-win for everyone. Hopefully, that's what we're all looking for--an ideal compromise where everyone's happy.