Quote:
Originally posted by jujueye
A quote for your linked article (which was interesting!)
"...Is file-swapping depriving large numbers of artists of their livelihood? That's not clear. Some artists have openly embraced it, just as they embraced cassettes and the radio. What is clear is that file-sharing is eating into the record companies' bottom line. It's also clear that it is a sign -- a flashing neon sign -- that music fans are unhappy with the state of the industry, and that it is no longer serving their music needs..."
|
It may surprise you to learn that the artists probably have no more right to share their music than you or I. They sold their rights to that music, and now they must use it under the terms of the label.
So what if the RIAA is picking its battles? So what if it is motivated by the dollar? They are businessmen, and yeah, file sharing is probably cutting into their bottom line. They have a right to defend that bottom line, just like Microsoft has the right to sue someone stealing their code or McDonalds has the right to charge someone pilfering money from the cash register.
Tinfoil, unless I'm mistaken, the cases have not been heard yet. The RIAA has attempted to sue people, but it's not like you have to cough up as soon as the RIAA points its big sharp stick at you. They still have to prove that you did not have the right to own the music you had, and that you did not have the right to share it. Indeed, they need to prove that you, individually, were sharing that music. As for your WiFi, it's another interesting legal issue; you shouldn't be sued for sharing the files yourself, but you may be liable for not taking adequate precautions against illegal activity on your network.