Still sounds like Karl Marx was right. At least in his observations of the mode of production. Being anti-capitalism doesn’t necessarily mean pro-communism, but you probably already knew that.

And klasic, the only reason VHS/tapes were and are legal is because Sony, the defendant, is a conglomerate. It can afford justice. Grokster was a little software company up against another conglomerate, MGM. Only the rich afford justice.

This reminds me of that mode, relations and forces of production as proposed by Karl Marx. We were taught that in our Anthropology class.

I actually used that in a paper (of course I didn’t get the idea from you. that would be plagiarism) without actually thinking if anyone else thought that the over-promoted-by-the-RIAA 70s, 80s would be that popular if file sharing had been invented at their time.

Cheers mate.

But, ah ah. We can make Tapes and sell them for an exorbitant price. And if we screw the artists’ out of most of their share, we’ll make even more money.

Then came DVD’s and now Blu Ray. Again, conniptions! Again, the electronics manufacturer’s won out. But, ah ah. We can make DVD’s and sell them for an exorbitant price. And if we screw the artists’ out of most of their share, we’ll make even more money.

The movie theaters are more popular than ever. I remember seeing 2001: A space Odyssey and Star Wars on the big screen. Tapes and DVD’s are nice on your TV, but it will never beat seeing a movie on a big screen.

Back in the 50’s and 60’s (in my youth) I and my friends participated in file sharing. Yes, you heard me right. The “sharing” was of 45 records. We didn’t do albums as much. Too costly and most times, there were only one or two songs on an album that were good. 45’s were relatively inexpensive and easy to carry (for that time). So, if one of us had a 45 that a friend wanted, we would swap ours for one of theirs.
Granted, nowhere near the volume of today’s “file sharing” but sharing still the same.

The music industry of that time didn’t care too much and it did increase sales. If I liked a particular song from a 45 I had swapped, I would go out and buy another 45 made by the same artist. By the way, there were also many “bootleg” 45 copies of the more popular songs, especially the Beatles. Things don’t change much.

I will not argue the legalities of copyright, infringement etc. This battle has been going on since Gutenberg’s’s era. The powers that be of that age wanted control of the publishing and printing of books. Within a few years of his invention, there were hundreds of printing presses through Europe cranking out books by the thousands. The common people loved the stream in information available. It increased public knowledge and enjoyment.

The powers to be of THIS age want control of the publishing and printing of music and movies. We commoners love the idea of the free flow of information. It increases our knowledge and enjoyment.

Do you see the pattern here? It has to do with control and greed.

I’m not saying that sharing is illegal or not. Or should anyone do it or not. The point is the internet is here to stay. The sharing of information over the internet is here to stay. To the music and film industries, you are not going to stop it. You will not be able to control it. Governments will not be able to control it nor stop it. Some have tried and failed. THIS IS THE DIGITAL AGE. The millions of people out there in the virtual world love the idea. Wake up and smell the coffee. Instead of fighting and suing the very people you want to sell your products to, work with them. Law makers of the U.S. get your heads out of the sand.

But it still won’t stop sharing. As fast as you try to stop it by whatever means, there are programmers and hackers out there that are extremely good at what they do. They’ll come up with a work around in no time!

I once heard that Bill Gates wanted to copyright 1’s and 0’s. Keep up the good fight Joel.

PS: I still have many of my old 45’s and LP’s. Most are in pristine condition and in their original jackets and worth a small fortune. Not for sale. I’m leaving them in my will to my children. They might pay for a new house if need be. Try doing that in future years with a digital copy.

The same thing is going on, here. They feel entitled to their monopoly. And no one seems to notice that antitrust laws are going down the drain. They manage huge collections of copyright material; they promote it, or trash it if they want to. And they charge huge fees for the right to listen; they bundle worthless tracks with hugely popular one, and sell only the right to listen to the whole bunch of crap. Are these legal practices, under antitrust laws?

(it says ’son’ instead of ’song’ … sorry!)