Should file sharing be illegal
 

I have to sign off till mid feb as of Friday as I have a project to do away fromthe pc but my mate got done for file sharing songs on an illegal website.
He argues people sell records at bootfairs and record off radio so if he has bought a song he should be able to share it or pass it on.
I bet many music fans here find illegal ways to get songs downloaded for free.
Should they be prosecuted?
Don't bands make enough money through radio and tours and doesn't file sharing help promote unsigned bands freely.
Should certain countries outside of the law be able to continue these file sharing methods or do record companies have the right to prosecute?

should it be illegal though.
They shut down and prosecute that is a different question and one very important in music.
films and other stuff too and some get done when they claim they got the ip wrong.
illegality rather then simply good idea.
illegality is what I meant.
they apparently keep opening up new sites and chanage them and have people in countries where laws cannot be applied pop up new sites and links and it will be a big case in the media soon.
should it be illegal worldwide.
internet laws don't really exist so how do each country prosecute people from other countries where the lawmay not be the same?
supposing switzerland doesn't impliment US law?
there is no global law on the net.
this effects file sharing as there will be havens like there are tax havens and different laws on sex.

Should it be illegal? Yes... we are stealing. Why do we engage in such acts though? Because records cost 10-15 dollars a piece, and no one can afford that. The entire system is flawed, and if record companies want to stop the thievery from happening then they need to rework the entire system, and not just expect everyone to conform to their outrageous business practices.

I agree.I mean, people sell cds are boot fairs and they can give a cd to a friend and yet if they pass it on on a blog they can get done.
But the thing is that pop idol such like shows that society is just fed a diatribe of crap mr blobby marketed rubbish and the best thing about the neet is that all types of bands and ideas can get an airing and the record companies want to monopolise it and use international laws to stop expression.
If you are not signed up you wont get exposure and noone will hear your stuff, I found many great songs over the years from bands noone has ever heard of and this is because they made their own album and put out a few.
The net means bands can get an airing and the RC's want to stop this freedom by introducing international laws.
Remember that new bands want exposure and freedom to share stuff helps this and they can then get more people to their gigs which is the point of being in a band.
I hate the control of the music buis as all people get is crap and many people haven't the time to search for new stuff and rely on the tv and radio to give it to them after work and unless we have free exchange the majority will never see stuff they may love to bits.
This stifles creativity and is outdated.
That is my opinion

At what point did 'Not choosing to buy something' become stealing?

because of copyright laws

So what am I supposed to do , block my ears every time someone drives past me in a car playing a CD loudly?

I don't think it's the same as stealing, really. If you copy a music file, it's not like you're taking it from anyone. The only thing you are removing is perhaps some of the probability that you will go and buy that bit of music. So - potentially - you copying could mean that the industry makes less money, but maybe you would never buy it anyways even if you didn't copy. Unless you distribute the file, that should for most parts be the end of that.

I'm not saying it should be legal because I think it's important that it's possible to make money off music, but while you could argue that "stealing" is a good word for it, I find it a bit unsatisfactory.

I haven't got that much else to add except I think products that can potentially have a digital existence should be sold over the internet - purely. Physical products like DVDs should be collector's items, not the norm. While it is nice to have physical products in your collection, I don't think it justifies all the production, transport, hiring people to sell them, etc. stuff that comes with it.

The music industry could perhaps make money with software such as spotify. Instead of having music on your own computer, you would stream it through spotify and artists would make money because of a little subtle commercial that would occasionally come up. If the service was good enough, for example so good that you get all the benefits of having the world's largest music collection without having to go through the trouble of actually collecting it yourself, then people would use it.

If the Rcs could find a way to make you pay for that they would.
how they control the new digital sharing noone yet knows.
perhaps they will just rely on the fact that most people haven't time to investigate what is out there and will buy what is marketed by pop idol.
Been a festival goer I have always noticed how many people see a small band or artist in a small tent and love them and buy their stuff.
Would they ever come across them in the record shops?
Books are the same.
Waterstones market certain books and not others because publishers pay them,
This is hemogeny and a result of the market.
This is why I think music should be free and bands that get a following will make aliving from other things like gigs and advertisng.