http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/...tra/P70240.asp

pretty much says it all.

What a joke!

I don't think so. I am a songwriter. From 1985 until 2002 I made most of my livelihood from my songwriting, and even now songwriting royalties are a substantial portion of my income. As far as I'm concerned, when any of my songs are downloaded without being paid for, I have been robbed.

well I think the point is that the RIAA isn't fighting for you. they are interested in making as much money for themselves as possible. they just use this whole "It's about principles" thing to try and make themselves look good, all the while they screw over artists when they can as well.

Well the record companies job is to get the artists material heard and to make them money. What's happening at the moment is the record companies are screwing the artists so only a very small portion of the money coming in is going to them.

The reason the RIAA hate file swapping is because they can't controll it and make money off it. A lot of artists don't mind it and some even support file sharing so I don't really see it as a major problem. It definately helps new bands being heard and helps spreading the word accross the world.

You might also be interested in reading this article on how much succesful Australian bands are making from selling records. Machine Gun Fellatio are one of Australia's top selling artists at the moment but the facts are from record sales they only make 4 cents an hour. The majority of a bands income comes from touring.

http://www.abc.net.au/arts/music/stories/s913325.htm

Stealing is still stealing. And I think its rather amusing that people try to tell me who RIAA is and is not fighting for when almost all of my recorded songs are on albums that organization represents.

Believe me, the vast majority of recording artists and songwriters support what RIAA, ASCAP, BMI and others are trying to do. We know it's big business and that we can't always trust them, but we also know that none of us have the clout to combat what's being done to us on our own.

I'm tired of hearing downloaders claim that what they're really doing is outsmarting RIAA. What they're REALLY doing is getting something for nothing because they'd rather not pay for it. It's not relevant to the issue that RIAA gives lousy royalties to artists and songwriters. At least they pay us SOMETHING. Downloaders and file-sharers are paying us NOTHING. That's the point.

The fact is that creators of music are stolen from when they are not compensated as the law requires. People who download and file-share without paying don't like to be told they're robbing the artists and songwriters. Well, I couldn't care less about that, because the truth is, they're robbing us. Many of you who read this are robbing us. That's just the fact of it. I'm not on a hate campaign, but I don't mind stating the truth about it.

[And by the way, if you're someone who temporarily downloads to decide if you want to buy the CD, then deletes the download after making a purchase decision (yay or nay), I'm not talking about you.]

Dont hit me! I download bugger all, put simply, if a mate tells me about a sick song, or if I caught a snippet of a song and want to hear more of it, then I'll download it. None of this 'full album' downloading stuff. Although, I do rip quite a few CD's from mates, but I dont share them over the internet. Whats your view on this, RR?

You know, I've pretty much stated my view in a positive way on this site a number of times. I'll state it again here...

I believe in supporting the artists whose music I love by buying their music.

Now, let me clarify a couple of things. I'm not above purchasing a used CD now and then, especially if its a hard-to-find or out-of-print item. I'm not above occasionally buying a bootleg if its an extremely rare collectable (such as a mono "Sgt Pepper" bootleg CD I purchased about a year or so back). So I'm not going to put down people who occasionally do that sort of thing. All serious music collectors have a few of those kinds of items in their collections (especially music industry people, by the way).

But as a rule, and especially nowadays, I prefer to go to retail stores and compare prices, or buy through record clubs. That way, I know I'm at least helping the artist to build a career, even if they may be getting a lousy cut from the company.

I just have a very firm conviction that it's right to build the bulk of my record collection by purchases which in some way offer the artists some support. I make occasional exceptions to that, but buying through the usual market channels is the rule for me, not the exception.

And I never, ever do free downloads.

I like your point RR, We're all pro-musician here, and how are you helping to musician to make more music by not paying for the CD? I'm a musician too and its f***ing double talk to say how much you support artists but also download free music, you aint supporting ANYONE, especially the artist. I'm a small time artist, and we sell our CD's at our shows for 5$ -10$ a pop. Thats where alot of band income comes from. Now what are we going to do if the music shows up online and instantly NO-one wants the cd, eat cardboard and grass!???
Props to you and those like you.

Well this ruling has far more to do with invasions of privacy than ethics.

The RIAA had been given a blank check, and the time has run out on that. They will now be forced to go through the same legal channels that have been in place for a long time, rather than demand identities of the so-called "innocent until proven guilty" citizens of the USA.

I am not going to bother to opine on the ethics of DLing free songs here, seeing as I have done so many other times in this section of the Radiomute forums. All I will say here is we have the technology to create something beautiful, and no one with any authority is doing jack right now. ITunes is hardly the answer, folks.