FreakyLocz14
Conservative Patriot
- 3,498
- Posts
- 14
- Years
- Seen Aug 29, 2018
What is your opinion on it?
I don't believe that internet piracy is stealing. Here's why:
In this example, Jack and Jill (I know, cliche names) are both looking to obtain music for free. Jack goes to a local store and walks out with a CD without paying for it. Jill downloads the song off a file sharing site.
The RIAA claims that the reason file sharing is wrong is because it costs the musician and record labels money. Let's explore that concept.
Since it costs money to manufacture CDs and distribute them to retail stores, Jack clearly cost the industry (as well as the retail store) money.
Let's look at Jill's situation. Jill downloaded a file that someone likely ripped from a CD that was purchased legally and had duplicate files made (btw, ripping CDs is not illegal) Even if we assume that the original was not obtained in that; however, the industry still loses no money. It cost the industry nothing for that file to be copied and distributed through the file sharing site.
The best thing the RIAA can claim is that the industry lost potential money. Well, that would require a big assumption: That Jill would have paid for the CD in the first place had there not been a pirated version available. That assumption might have seemed logical before the age of the internet. Now Jill has a whole host of alternative ways to obtain the music she's after. One of these includes the way people used to "pirate" music before the internet age: Waiting for the song to come on the radio and recording it to a cassette.
So, you see, without unsure assumptions being made, there is no way to demonstrate that internet piracy is stealing.
I don't believe that internet piracy is stealing. Here's why:
In this example, Jack and Jill (I know, cliche names) are both looking to obtain music for free. Jack goes to a local store and walks out with a CD without paying for it. Jill downloads the song off a file sharing site.
The RIAA claims that the reason file sharing is wrong is because it costs the musician and record labels money. Let's explore that concept.
Since it costs money to manufacture CDs and distribute them to retail stores, Jack clearly cost the industry (as well as the retail store) money.
Let's look at Jill's situation. Jill downloaded a file that someone likely ripped from a CD that was purchased legally and had duplicate files made (btw, ripping CDs is not illegal) Even if we assume that the original was not obtained in that; however, the industry still loses no money. It cost the industry nothing for that file to be copied and distributed through the file sharing site.
The best thing the RIAA can claim is that the industry lost potential money. Well, that would require a big assumption: That Jill would have paid for the CD in the first place had there not been a pirated version available. That assumption might have seemed logical before the age of the internet. Now Jill has a whole host of alternative ways to obtain the music she's after. One of these includes the way people used to "pirate" music before the internet age: Waiting for the song to come on the radio and recording it to a cassette.
So, you see, without unsure assumptions being made, there is no way to demonstrate that internet piracy is stealing.