Should people be able to download free music?

[usregimechange]

The type that is likely copyrighted?

[More Than A Feeling]

1. No, it is theft to take intellectual property that has been copyrighted

without payment or permission. and spare me talk of how little profit goes to the artist, and the profits and the refusal to change of the music industry. What they do or do not do has no bearing on the wrongness of the downloader's deed.

[LoZoccolo]

2. If the copyright holder gives permission.

As the independant labels and artists do at this promotional site:

http://www.betterpropaganda.com

[mykpart]

3. If you can record a TV program and record music from the radio,

why can't you download music that is copyrighted, as long as it is for personal use?

[More Than A Feeling]

4. Because those are paid for by advertising

not sold directly to the consumer?:shrug:

[mykpart]

6. Not if you tape it from PBS or NPR.

[More Than A Feeling]

9. Those are funded by donations and non-profit foundations, right? n/t

[usregimechange]

5. Good question!

[aePrime]

7. Sure

I recommend http://www.bradsucks.net/

[madrchsod]

8. better close down ebay

cause i`m buying alot of music that there are no royalties being paid. better close the used record stores cause they are not paying either...

[MercutioATC]

10. Only if the artist releases the music for free download.

Otherwise, it's theft.

[TexasLady]

11. oh great, does this mean

that im goin down?

when i was a kid, i taped it all on my new shiny tape recorder, and now I tape it to my shiny new computer.

guilty as charged.

[jdj]

12. Hell no.

most artists are progressive, we need to support them so they can make a living getting the message out.

people should pay the artists directly, and eliminate the middle man pr and a&r people and producers. I was really impressed with Eminem's single "Toy soldiers" (or at least that's the name of the old Martika tune he samples in it) where he talks about how artists are manipulated by these fat cats.

I'm sick of it. I think distribution will soon be straight from artist to fan, and the hell with these producers and their crap, they are the reason alt. music doesn't get any airplay. Hardly anyone listens to radio anymore with MP3 and IPOD and satellite. And MTV never seems to play any music anymore.

They are always going to have to go through the middle man to book concert halls and sell tickets unless artists band together and start buying arenas and booking companies, but as far as the pure product there is not need for us consumers to have to pay anyone but the artists and the pure production costs.

[Zuni]

13. Yes. I do it, so its ok

[imenja]

14. that music is someone's creative property

You should pay for it.

[Az]

15. Capitalism is destructive to music and art

Yes artists need to be paid. They need to be compensated for the contributions. But capitalism bleeds the social aspect of music from its heart. It silences true creativity in exchange for the predictibility of mass marketting. Budget concerns drive the course of music rather than art.

It used to be there were no copyright laws. People would take other's work and readapt them and over time true works of art were developed. Shakespeare, Homer, and many others have built their master works from the shells of others work. We are a social species. The greatest things we accomplish come from this form of communal effort.