[jambutty]

When you buy a CD shakermaker you own the disk but you do not own the music on it. So if you allow tracks off the CD to be downloaded via this P2P thing you as well as the downloader are in breach of the copyright act and the P2P site for aiding and abetting. The music industry has every right to get the P2P sites closed down.

The sleeve notes and cover artwork are also copyrighted so copying those is illegal. Unless you pay for them of course or there is a note to state that all copyright claims have been waived. An unlikely scenario.

I get back to my original premise – if it were your work that was being copied and you were losing revenue your view would be different.

No one is arguing that we haven’t been overcharged for records etc for decades, we have, but it doesn’t come into the equation in spite of people trying to put it in. “Milud, I made a copy of the CD for my friend because the record industry have been ripping me off for years with their inflated prices.” Try it as an excuse in a court of law and it won’t hold water.

Every illegal download is a POTENTIAL sale lost Cyfr. If someone wants something badly enough they will go and buy it, inflated prices and all. Some will not.

If my reasoning is the same as RIAA’s then they have got it right within the law.

Digital Cameras are used to record SOME films in cinemas illegaly, should we be banning digital cameras??

I assume that you really mean digital camcorders. That’s a nonsense comparison, but yes if you also ban CD and DVD recorders. It’s not the hardware that is being used it is the purpose that the hardware is being used for that is the contentious issue.

I accept that no matter what arguments are put forward you will not agree with them until you stand on the other side of the coin. So let’s just agree to disagree.