 Posted by Steve on January 24, 2003: I assure you that this is an accurate portayal of how things work around here. Sure I do most of the html stuff, and I get the occasional writer's block, but my job is infinitely easier than Bob's, and that makes me very, very happy.
Now, on to other business.
I'm sure by now you've heard about this. And I know that most people are replying with outrage and shock and whipping up conspiracy theories of how first it's this name, and next there's going to be a federal agent busting down your door just for looking at a file sharing program. Well, if that's your opinion, and you're terribly sensitive about this issue, now might be a good time for you to go read a book or check out Aikida or something, and we'll meet up again next week, cause this is probably going to give you a headache.
Ok. Let's get this right out in the open. Downloading mp3's of songs you don't own is stealing. It might not seem like it because it's through the internet, and for some reason we all think anything on the internet should be free, but it's stealing. Now, I'm not going to be the morality police here, but at least call it what it is and stop the "they make enough anyway" and "I can't afford to buy it anyway, so they're not losing money." excuses. (when did it become ok to take something just because you can't afford to purchase it? Walk into Best Buy and try that logic out on security, let me know how it works out for you.)
Second, and this is going to hurt, being over charged for an item does not leave you in the clear to steal it. Music is no different than any other product, the company is going to charge as much as they can. So if you want to do something about it, boycott the product. The quickest and easiest way to let a company know what you think is with your wallet. You stop paying 20 bucks for a CD, and they'll stop selling you CD's for 20 bucks. And no, downloading instead of buying isn't the same thing. All that's doing is showing them that there's still a demand for the music.
Third, let's keep this in mind. This cat that they're after didn't just hop on the net, grab a track, and suddenly the RIAA unleashed the hounds of hell on the poor guy. The guy grabbed over 600 mp3's in a day. And as far as freedom of speech goes, how exactly that relates to the right to steal 600 songs and not pay for them is beyond me.
Fourth, let's not make a martyr out of Verizon just yet. They refused to give up the guy's ID cause it was in their best interest, plain and simple. Not because they want to protect their users or any of that heroic crap. Let's not forget, this is the same Verizon who wanted the right to share your calling information without your permission, so don't be confused on where they stand on your right to privacy.
Now don't get me wrong, I'm not by any means saying that the RIAA is a group of saints, with only the needs of the consumer in mind. I know record labels over charge, and I know they screw the artists with shitty contracts and so on. And I'm not saying I'm a saint either. I'm just saying that it is possible for even the RIAA to be right once in awhile. See you next week.
|
