Arch - Napster is not an ally to any musician. Napster has created and supports a program which does nothing short than encourage the distribution of an artists music without their consent. This violates copyright law. I agree with your statements that mp3's, and music downloads do not hurt an artist. They only hurt an artist when a piece of their music is distributed against their expressed consent. Grateful Dead, for example, may have allowed fans the ability to record their shows, then to freely distribute those tapes. That is their choice. Their lawyers will attack and sue anyone who attempts to gain any money in any way using their art or logos. TLC, Prince, Elton John, et al. who may have run into problems dealing with major record companies are situations which play no bearing on Napster. The fact is, each of those artists would sue anyone who attempts to distribute their work against their wishes. Any self-respecting artist would feel the same way. This is all a part of (here's that ugly word) capitalism and the ability of individuals to make a living on their own abilities. TLC was making money until they made "Waterfalls." They overspent on that video. BTW, there is no law that says you or anyone else can't make copies of music which you have bought. Whether those copies are made with cassette, CD-R, or mp3 ... it doesn't matter. You can. You may not make a hundred copies and give them freely to a hundred different people. An artist which would like to self produce may do so. They may even allow people to share and download some or all of their music. It's their choice ... not yours. That is all ... keep up the great discussion!!! Cheers,Axecell
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provided in real-time. NYSE, NASDAQ and NYSEMKT data delayed 15 minutes.
Real-Time prices provided by BATS. Market data provided by Interactive Data.
Company fundamental data provided by Morningstar. Earnings Estimates, Analyst Ra