January 08, 2005

NAPSTER

I love the South Park episode where the boys get arrested for downloading music and Lars Ulrich is crying because he has to save up before he can get his gold-plated shark tank bar installed next to the pool. According to Hud, music sales are up. There are two things I don't understand about the Napster hullabaloo. First of all, why don't book authors try to ban libraries? I mean, hundreds of people can just walk in there and read their books for free. Why don't authors get their underpants bunched about book swapping? And secondly, I have bought several CDs this past year, but all from sites like half.com or the Amazon market. The artists don't make any money when I do that either. Why would they freak out if I can download one song for free, when I could get the entire album for $3.70 from someone else and not give them a dime? If it's really about losing money for artists, why aren't they concerned about losing money in other ways? What about music clubs where you get 10 CDs for a penny? Don't they get less money that way too?

Posted by: Sarah at 01:54 AM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 196 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Your "questionable content" filter needs some work, dear.

Posted by: Francis W. Porretto at January 08, 2005 07:49 AM (MzH7h)

2 Sorry, that's all up to mu.nu...

Posted by: Sarah at January 08, 2005 09:05 AM (e/5ZT)

3 They have tried. John Cougar Mellencamp led an effort to get royalties from used cd stores in the late 80s early 90s. We still have not settled the physical media/intellectual-artistic content argument over ownership yet.

Posted by: thomas at January 08, 2005 09:48 AM (FCQng)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
42kb generated in CPU 0.05, elapsed 0.2495 seconds.
48 queries taking 0.2208 seconds, 170 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.