Ok, while I'm very much against music piracy, I'll admit that suing individuals is more than a bit extreme. The RIAA is becoming counterproductive; piracy is bad, but clamping down on individual pirates through the courts probably isn't going to help. In fact, it's more expensive than it's worth. This stikes me as vindictive.

"Piracy" of music is NOT wrong. Copywrights are in place to prevent people from copying music; in the sense that Metallica has a song, and I cant just go re-record it to make a profit. Also in the sense that I can't take Metallica's music, burn 100 copy's and sell them for $5 a piece. That is wrong. Taking a song, digitizing it, and giving it to a buddy of mine down the street is ok. It would be the same if I just let him borrow the CD indefinately. Only I get to listen to it too. What if I wanted to have all my music on my computer, and so I imported all my CD's. Then I turned around and sold those CD's to someone else to get rid of them. I am selling the music I paid for, but I retain the music. Is that illegal?

Well, I believe it is indeed illegal to sell the CDs, but keep a copy for yourself. It is considered fair use, to convert CDs to audio tape or your computer for personal use, however.

Still, you have to ask yourself, who owns the music. I mean, if a burglar breaks in and steals all your CDs, who is calling the police; You, or the RIAA?

thebear,

Sorry, but what you describe IS piracy. Sure, the RIAA shouldn't care if you copy a couple of songs for a friend. It might be costing them money, but the net effect is minimal. However, if you copy a few songs, put them online, and let a few thousand people get the songs for free, THAT'S piracy. Whether or not you make money on it or not isn't the issue.

M-E-T-A-L-L-I-C-A is the greatest band in the world!