RIAA Suggests MIT Student Drop Out Of School To Pay Fine

HelterSkelter · 06-04-2006 11:02AM

MorningStar wrote:

Well what makes you decide a fair price?

Well I don't think €10 to download an album is a fair price. Do you?

CD wow don't pay tax here that is 21%. Or rent publuc liability insurance. Not a fair comparison in my eyes

That is a red herring. Companies locate in other countries all the time to save costs. Lots of american companies locate here due to tax savings. If that is the principal you abide by are you going to refuse their business or refuse a job from them?

MorningStar wrote:

SO you only steal things for a little while.

I don't consider it stealing. I consider it a trial period, like when you sign a contract, buy a Dell computer, etc you have 7 days to change your mind. If you don't want it you can return it and get your money back. If I don't like the album I delete it, if I do I buy it.

MorningStar wrote:

Some people make the permenant and if the record company wants to stop that happening is it wrong they sue those letting that happen?

I wouldn't mind them suing people if they were charging a fair price for their downloads in the first place. In my opinion a tenner is not a fair price.

Sorry but I have absolutely no sympathy for the record companies .

BobTheBeat · 06-04-2006 11:18AM

Dragan wrote:

Why not just have them pay whatever the relevant artists would have made had the songs been purchased leagally, through one of the websites?????

It would make just a little bit more sense.

I am guessing that there is a deterrent factor in the fine. If it is sufficiently large enough, the tendancy to reoffend is much lower plus it sets an example for the rest of the would be offenders!

Boggle · 06-04-2006 11:19AM

No overstatement. How much do you think it costs to advertise an adverst record an album and ship a CD? Theft is the natural progression greed is what I see you are saying.

Greed? There's enough of that to go around in this case. Everyone needs to compromise - they need to charge realistic prices and not expect billions for rehashing the same old tripe time and time again and we as a public will (do) pay for the music we like.

I suggest you look at the drop in sales of CDs and also see the number of legal download services don't match.

I would suggest that there's more to that than just the prevalence of p2p filesharing.

http://news.com.com/2100-1027_3-5181562.html

THe industry is really protecting the future of many thing but noticably films. Unlike music general quality will not make people eventually go out and buy the movie.

I never used to buy films but since we startd downloading films I go out and buy the ones I like... It also helps that over here you can get films alot cheaper than I could do at home.

Normal listeners are going to spend time searching for bands through the wave of ****e.

We don't have to - Dj's will generally do that for you and then you can pick the ones you like...

MorningStar · 06-04-2006 11:28AM

HelterSkelter wrote:

Well I don't think €10 to download an album is a fair price. Do you?

How much does it cost to produce and advertise an album. WHen you know that maybe you can figure what is fair

HelterSkelter wrote:

That is a red herring. Companies locate in other countries all the time to save costs. Lots of american companies locate here due to tax savings. If that is the principal you abide by are you going to refuse their business or refuse a job from them?

How is it a red herring cd wow sell for €13 a shop charges €20. 21% of 13 is 2.73. Straight away they avoid irish tax making them ablle to sell cheaper. Insurance and staff cost can easily make up the rest and as they come from china staff is a lot cheaper.

HelterSkelter wrote:

I don't consider it stealing. I consider it a trial period, like when you sign a contract, buy a Dell computer, etc you have 7 days to change your mind. If you don't want it you can return it and get your money back. If I don't like the album I delete it, if I do I buy it.

THat's nice it is stealing whether you think so or not. Dell company policy doesn't effect the law

HelterSkelter wrote:

I wouldn't mind them suing people if they were charging a fair price for their downloads in the first place. In my opinion a tenner is not a fair price.

Sorry but I have absolutely no sympathy for the record companies .

Again how do you KNOW what is fair. % years after supporting a band and 2 failed albums and one big sellers might make up for it but if you don't get the return on your investment that doesn't sound fair.

AS I said the record industry are not the only ones who suffer. I suggest you walk into HMV and tell people who work ther you don't care if you make them loose their job. Tell the pension company that rents the shop to them that you don't care about them either. Tell your parents you don't care about ther pensions and the govenrment you don't think you should pay tax on your luxury items. Don't forget to tell any artist trying to make it to forget it as you will steal from their pockets. Tell me you don't care if I loose my job priovding the businesses with software.
Cause and effect. The record industry is not the only people who suffer. I don't care if some selfish student destroys their life by stealing.

the_syco · 06-04-2006 11:39AM

Most people who download, wouldn't buy the CD normally. BUT, those who download songs, that they wouldn't usually listen to, may goto a concert, which they'd never have gone too, if it wasn't for some random track they got. Same goes for movies.

RIAA think that everyone who downloads would have shelled out money for that CD.

Oh, and if ye upload stuff, you should know that you may be caught.

gline · 06-04-2006 11:45AM

the_syco wrote:

Most people who download, wouldn't buy the CD normally. BUT, those who download songs, that they wouldn't usually listen to, may goto a concert, which they'd never have gone too, if it wasn't for some random track they got. Same goes for movies.

RIAA think that everyone who downloads would have shelled out money for that CD.

Oh, and if ye upload stuff, you should know that you may be caught.

this is true

I think it is a little harsh to ask someone to leave colledge.. thus affecting their whole life just for downloading some songs
Unless she was actually mass uploading stuff , then it is a different story

L31mr0d · 06-04-2006 11:47AM

Just think about this next time you illegally download those mp3's

Downloading Info

HelterSkelter · 06-04-2006 11:49AM

MorningStar wrote:

How much does it cost to produce and advertise an album. WHen you know that maybe you can figure what is fair

I am comparing the cost of a CD to a download. They couldn't be passing the savings on if the CD is only 2 or 3 quid more expensive than the downloadable album

MorningStar wrote:

How is it a red herring cd wow sell for €13 a shop charges €20. 21% of 13 is 2.73. Straight away they avoid irish tax making them ablle to sell cheaper. Insurance and staff cost can easily make up the rest and as they come from china staff is a lot cheaper.

Becuase I am comparing CDWOW with iTunes, NOT HMV or other high street record stores. As far as I'm aware iTunes don't pay Irish tax either.

MorningStar wrote:

THat's nice it is stealing whether you think so or not. Dell company policy doesn't effect the law

It is not Dell company policy, it is the law. You are allowed to change your mind within 7 days of signing a contract.Dell selling their computers falls under this law.

MorningStar wrote:

Again how do you KNOW what is fair. % years after supporting a band and 2 failed albums and one big sellers might make up for it but if you don't get the return on your investment that doesn't sound fair.

They are not passing on the savings. I wouldn't be surprised if they make more money from a downloaded album than a CD sale.

MorningStar wrote:

AS I said the record industry are not the only ones who suffer. I suggest you walk into HMV and tell people who work ther you don't care if you make them loose their job.

As I said I was talking about iTunes and CDWOW. I never mentioned HMV or other high street stores. Anyway I am not going to pay more money for any product to keep someone in a job. Do you do all your grocery shopping in the local Spar rather than a Dunnes Stores or Tesco who are cheaper because you are worried about the Spar employees losing their jobs??????? I thought not

MorningStar wrote:

Tell the pension company that rents the shop to them that you don't care about them either. Tell your parents you don't care about ther pensions and the govenrment you don't think you should pay tax on your luxury items. Don't forget to tell any artist trying to make it to forget it as you will steal from their pockets. Tell me you don't care if I loose my job priovding the businesses with software.

Ha ha ha, you have me in stitches here. Your arguments are becoming laughable now. So you think I should pay higher prices for my CD's to protect vested interests like pension companies and software developers. If that's the case I should fly with Aer Lingus or British Airways all the time because god forbid I fly with Ryanair or Easyjet who are doing all those poor people out of their jobs by cutting costs. I should not use this new online check in Ryanair are proposing because the check in staff will lose their jobs in Dublin Airport. MorningStar, you talk sense most of the time but on this occasion I think you are really losing your marbles!!

MorningStar wrote:

Cause and effect. The record industry is not the only people who suffer. I don't care if some selfish student destroys their life by stealing.

As I said I don't have any sympathy for the record companies, and by this I mean the big labels.

HelterSkelter · 06-04-2006 11:51AM

the_syco wrote:

those who download songs, that they wouldn't usually listen to, may goto a concert, which they'd never have gone too, if it wasn't for some random track they got. Same goes for movies.

That's an excellent point. I have downloaded some songs and I am just waiting for the bands to play a concert here.

ressem · 06-04-2006 11:59AM

Years ago they said the music industry would be destroyed by people recording songs off the radio.Then it was cassette copying.instead it just got bigger and bigger .There will always be enough suckers out there to support the industry and pay over the odds for their music.

CD slaes have dropped the industry is making less money . What happened in the past does not mean it will happen again as they aren't the same things

But its simple to plausibly argue that it's matters other than piracy to blame.

eg.
In the late 70's decreases were blamed on the cassette recorder.
Between '81 and '84 MTV starts up and is credited with helping sales reach record levels, 8% higher than the previous best.

Now MTV find that showing cheap reality TV shows gets more of an audience and limit music to the dead of night.
Due to digital TV, introducing newish music to a large TV viewing audience seems to be limited to TV ads and TV soap like the OC. The plethora of 'old MTV' knockoffs appear to aim at small audience segments and none appear all that popular.

So responsibility is on the publishing companies, whose job it is to market the product to set up an alternative method of marketing to those who don't actively search for music.
Eg a music link on google home page which links to an audio broadcast stream, encouraging people who don't go looking for music to click on it as they start browsing and leave it running in the background all day. Content has to be chosen so that it's perceived to be better than average radio or podcast. And don't split the audience by providing too many different channels unless they go looking.

What do you think? Just as likely a cause as the 'pillaging pirates' vitreol?

MorningStar · 06-04-2006 12:08PM

HelterSkelter wrote:

I am comparing the cost of a CD to a download. They couldn't be passing the savings on if the CD is only 2 or 3 quid more expensive than the downloadable album

Well obviously you don't understand. Cd production ins't very expensive all the other stuff is expensive. Group buying deals mean discounts get passed on to consumers. These giscounts no longer exist on downloads

HelterSkelter wrote:

It is not Dell company policy, it is the law. You are allowed to change your mind within 7 days of signing a contract.Dell selling their computers falls under this law.

THen I misunderstood you. On retail on normal good you don't have 7 days so whay has a contract got to do with retail sales?

HelterSkelter wrote:

They are not passing on the savings. I wouldn't be surprised if they make more money from a downloaded album than a CD sale.

CDs are more expensive than downloads so how is it not pased on? A differnt price model for a differnt distribution model

HelterSkelter wrote:

As I said I was talking about iTunes and CDWOW. I never mentioned HMV or other high street stores. Anyway I am not going to pay more money for any product to keep someone in a job. Do you do all your grocery shopping in the local Spar rather than a Dunnes Stores or Tesco who are cheaper because you are worried about the Spar employees losing their jobs??????? I thought not

This thread is about illegal download and uploads you want to rabit on about the new distribution model I suggest you start another thread. Stealing from the grocery store so you don't buy in Spar would be what is being discussed using your metaphore

HelterSkelter wrote:

Ha ha ha, you have me in stitches here. Your arguments are becoming laughable now. So you think I should pay higher prices for my CD's to protect vested interests like pension companies and software developers. If that's the case I should fly with Aer Lingus or British Airways all the time because god forbid I fly with Ryanair or Easyjet who are doing all those poor people out of their jobs by cutting costs. I should not use this new online check in Ryanair are proposing because the check in staff will lose their jobs in Dublin Airport. MorningStar, you talk sense most of the time but on this occasion I think you are really losing your marbles!!

I think you shouldn't steal and say it is right becasue you think you ONLY effect a record label. I am talking stealing you want to complain about iTune start another thread.

HelterSkelter wrote:

As I said I don't have any sympathy for the record companies, and by this I mean the big labels.

THat is nice for you but as I pointed out it effects others and is illegal. The record companies are in the right and you wouldn't have any of your music if it wasn't for them. You just fall into the ignorant group of people who think the record companies do nothing

MorningStar · 06-04-2006 12:24PM

ressem wrote:

But its simple to plausibly argue that it's matters other than piracy to blame.

Yes it is plausible. It still doesn't making stealing and allowing others to steal right or defendable. THe tape recoding thing had at least a temporary effect. Th eproblem being that tapes recorded poorer quality and limited life span. Digital downloads are better quality and close to the commercial product.
Stealing is still stealing and making an example out somebody they caught seems fair to me. What is actually wronmg with it?
Bear in mind it isn't whether it is illegal or not it is illegal as fact.

pyramuid man · 06-04-2006 12:24PM

I dont mean to rant here so I wont. The RIAA should examine its own practices. They knowingly broke the law by accessing file sharing programmes. At the time when this was happening, the people were more than likely not aware that what they were doing was wrong and therefore continued to do so. All this crap about record companies losing money is irrelevant. A study has shown and people who downloaded a song from a PTP network were more often going to buy the album. So if anything the profits would have increased. Finally, The reason the record companies are loosing money is because they are publishing talentless wankstains like Xfactor winners and leaving the really talented artists unsigned. Rediculous.

HelterSkelter · 06-04-2006 12:36PM

MorningStar, my whole point is that people would be less inclined to download illegally if the record companies charged a fair price for music downloads. I think a tenner for a album download is not fair.

Try to answer these two simple questions with a yes or no:
Do you think €10 is a fair price for an album download?
Do you think if an album download was cheaper then more people would pay for downloads resulting in more sales and more profits for the record companies and artists?

With sales of downloadable music there are no costs associated with production & copying of the CD, no costs of printing artwork, no costs of rentiing/buying property for warehouses, no distribution costs and probably other cost savings I haven't thought of. Still a downloadable album from a legal source is only 2 or 3 euro cheaper than a site that legally sells CD's. Tha t doesn't sound fair to me.

That is my point.

Boggle · 06-04-2006 12:50PM

Morningstar wrote:

Yes it is plausible. It still doesn't making stealing and allowing others to steal right or defendable.

Its NOT stealing. Stealing is taking something that belongs to someone else. COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT is when you copy something belonging to someone else. Quit with using exagerations to bolster your case.

You still go on about how me downloading a track affects jobs - I have shown a study that reckons it doesn't... care to do likewise to prove your point?

Your argument MOrningstar is it's the law full stop. No one is denying that. What people are saying is that while we agree that you should have to pay - the prices being demanded are completely unrealistic and are conducive to illegal downloading.

Tell me, do you believe that we are currently being charged a fair price for our music?

MorningStar · 06-04-2006 12:56PM

HelterSkelter wrote:

MorningStar, my whole point is that people would be less inclined to download illegally if the record companies charged a fair price for music downloads. I think a tenner for a album download is not fair.

I keep asking you how do you know what is fair?
I'm answering your question so answer that.
Once something is unfair in your eyes do you think it is fair to steal it?
If you want a house and you think they are unfairly priced, is it ok to break in and squat?
You see something you like and you think it is too expensive is it OK to steal it?

HelterSkelter wrote:

Try to answer these two simple questions with a yes or no:
Do you think €10 is a fair price for an album download?
Do you think if an album download was cheaper then more people would pay for downloads resulting in more sales and more profits for the record companies and artists?

Yes
No (althought your question is too complicated to be very accurate)

HelterSkelter wrote:

With sales of downloadable music there are no costs associated with production & copying of the CD, no costs of printing artwork, no costs of rentiing/buying property for warehouses, no distribution costs and probably other cost savings I haven't thought of. Still a downloadable album from a legal source is only 2 or 3 euro cheaper than a site that legally sells CD's. Tha t doesn't sound fair to me.

That is my point.

Wrong there are costs you just don't think there are. What sounds fair to you is based on what? You think loads of things are free that aren't. THe actual production and distribution of a CD is about 2-3 euro. Go look it up if you don't beleive me. THe point is you aren't looking at the costs you are just saying they don't have costs. Ever seen a data warehouse they cost money to run. How much is IT support? Back up and redundancy?

MorningStar · 06-04-2006 01:06PM

Boggle wrote:

Its NOT stealing. Stealing is taking something that belongs to someone else. COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT is when you copy something belonging to someone else. Quit with using exagerations to bolster your case.

You still go on about how me downloading a track affects jobs - I have shown a study that reckons it doesn't... care to do likewise to prove your point?

Your argument MOrningstar is it's the law full stop. No one is denying that. What people are saying is that while we agree that you should have to pay - the prices being demanded are completely unrealistic and are conducive to illegal downloading.

Tell me, do you believe that we are currently being charged a fair price for our music?

In every country it is is considered stealing. THe law in this country it is illegal as in the us. You show a study that thinks it doesn't but is not conclusive. It remains illegal.
My argument is that copyright infringment is stealing and I statee it read back and quote that and argue against what I said on the subject.
THe courts and I agree it is illegal. Your belief is not considered. Explain why you think you are right over all the people who have studied law and fairness in law.
Tell me how much it cost to create a single music track that sells and will make a profit? You just claim the price is unfair what is your proof it is unfair?

astrofool · 06-04-2006 01:14PM

I think a point is MorningStar is that it has been proven that the prices are unfairly fixed, as pointed to by the court cases they have lost because they were acting as a cartel keeping the prices artificially high.

Anyone remember back to cd + tapes? The argument initially was that cd's cost more to make, and thus demanded a higher price, now the complete opposite is true, yet cd's still demand the same premiums (same goes for VHS vs. DVD)

MorningStar · 06-04-2006 01:19PM

astrofool wrote:

I think a point is MorningStar is that it has been proven that the prices are unfairly fixed, as pointed to by the court cases they have lost because they were acting as a cartel keeping the prices artificially high.

When was it proven did I miss a link or something becasue all I seem to here is people whinging and saying it is too high but no proof. Post the link and I'll comment on this "proof" otherwise I choose not to believe you

astrofool wrote:

Anyone remember back to cd + tapes? The argument initially was that cd's cost more to make, and thus demanded a higher price, now the complete opposite is true, yet cd's still demand the same premiums (same goes for VHS vs. DVD)

Actually cds always had an extra charge for devlopment and are a licenced technology which the record companies pay to use. Tapes never really dominated the western market it was mostly records and then cd.

astrofool · 06-04-2006 01:34PM

*cough* ass *cough*

http://www.usatoday.com/life/music/news/2002-09-30-cd-settlement_x.htm

(there was another a few years before that, which I'm sure you can google)

And the cost of producing CD's is miniscule to that of producing tapes and records, but you already know that don't you? (i.e. don't be pedantic)

MorningStar · 06-04-2006 01:49PM

astrofool wrote:

*cough* ass *cough*

http://www.usatoday.com/life/music/news/2002-09-30-cd-settlement_x.htm (there was another a few years before that, which I'm sure you can google)

And the cost of producing CD's is miniscule to that of producing tapes and records, but you already know that don't you? (i.e. don't be pedantic)

First off what does you caugh remark menat to mean? I take it as an insult and as I didn't insult you there is no need for it. It is not like I am raping your mother I have a differnt opinion to yours.

I live in Ireland not the US and the EU court deals with such pricing issues. Have you evidence of this happening here?
THe death penalty is there and not here too so posting a report on how somebody gets the death peanlty has no bearing here. The colusion was with retail chains which are not all here.

CD licencing increases production costs so I wasn't being pedantic you just don't know something I do. CD production costs plus fee to use technology mean higher price than production cost.

Peteee · 06-04-2006 01:50PM

Funny how they say music sales are falling, when its the opposite.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/4712270.stm

For all those people who say its 'copyright infringement', how would you feel if you wrote a book for 5 years, published as a PDF, selling it electronically for €40 (or whatever) and saw people downloading it for free????

ressem · 06-04-2006 01:52PM

They were investigated for price fixing by the UK fair trading and EU commission, but it wasn't proven that they had a collectively dominent position.
http://competition.practicallaw.com/6-102-9293

One view of the cost of producing a CD album is
http://www.cnn.com/interactive/entertainment/0101/cd.price/frameset.exclude.html

Of a $17 CD, about $5.71 appears applicable to creating the music.
First figure that popped up as Apples share (from a biased anti iTunes source) for distribution was 35%.

Add sales tax and you're not far off $10.

The 1ECU = 1$ rate that everybody charges is for another day.

MorningStar · 06-04-2006 02:11PM

Peteee wrote:

Funny how they say music sales are falling, when its the opposite.

That is in the UK world wide they have fallen. Legal music downloads in some countries account for it as do other items aimed at the same market but it still doen't allowing stealing.

I see what you are saying but the UK market has regularly acted differntly to the rest of the world hence universal realese albums with extra track to the UK market. Ireland is generally seen as the UK market for distribution and pricing reasons.

Gald to see somebody else sees theft

HelterSkelter · 06-04-2006 02:18PM

MorningStar wrote:

I keep asking you how do you know what is fair?
I'm answering your question so answer that.

What I consider a fair price (or in this case I consider €10 not a fair price) is my personal opinion.

MorningStar wrote:

Once something is unfair in your eyes do you think it is fair to steal it?

No.
I am not stealing anything. I am sampling a product before I buy it.

MorningStar wrote:

If you want a house and you think they are unfairly priced, is it ok to break in and squat?
You see something you like and you think it is too expensive is it OK to steal it?

*sigh* Over the top scenarios again.

MorningStar wrote:

No (althought your question is too complicated to be very accurate) -

In many other businesses (low cost airlines spring to mind) reducing the selling price results in more people buying the product and increased profits. Why wouldn't this be the case with downloadable music?

MorningStar wrote:

Wrong there are costs you just don't think there are.

I am well aware there are costs.

MorningStar · 06-04-2006 02:36PM

HelterSkelter wrote:

What I consider a fair price (or in this case I consider €10 not a fair price) is my personal opinion.

Not if you state that what is going on is unfair. YOu have to state what is fair by your judgement

HelterSkelter wrote:

No.
I am not stealing anything. I am sampling a product before I buy it.

Then use the service that allow you to sample rather than helping/supporting those that do steal. Amazon comes to mind. Do you get to sample everything you want to buy?

HelterSkelter wrote:

*sigh* Over the top scenarios again.
"You see something you like and you think it is too expensive is it OK to steal it?"

An over the top senario? Seems very reasonable to me. Are you are are you not defending the student that helped people steal?(as some do maybe not you this is important)

HelterSkelter wrote:

In many other businesses (low cost airlines spring to mind) reducing the selling price results in more people buying the product and increased profits. Why wouldn't this be the case with downloadable music?

But it is also been proven that a high price or limited supply protects things. If music were to be devalued it would not be appriciated. ALl the free cds with papers are n example.

HelterSkelter wrote:

I am well aware there are costs.

Well you said the costs were practicly nill in the new way of distribution

Boggle · 06-04-2006 02:38PM

THe courts and I agree it is illegal. Your belief is not considered.

Your losing the run of yourself lad. Read my posts before replying please - did I say it wasn't illegal? No. What I told you is why people do it. Then I questioned the assertions of the record companies that it was hurting their business. None of which were deemed worthy of comment...

Tell me how much it cost to create a single music track that sells and will make a profit? You just claim the price is unfair what is your proof it is unfair?

I could if the RIAA had that info available... or decided to release it.

To be honest - even if they could tell me that they were only breaking even my answer would be that they need to re-examine their costs as at those prices I will not buy but will (maybe) listen to radio instead.

THe courts and I agree it is illegal. Your belief is not considered.

:eek: This has always been your arguing style - refuse to answer a question instead you appear to throw sensationalist remarks around. I remember when we discussed houses or such - you kept dodging/ignoring every question, instead choosing to repeat the same argument until people just got bored. Please don't do it here... don't have much time in work to be browsing so don't wanna waste it going in circles.

Lemming · 06-04-2006 02:41PM

I will reply to this thread later today. With links to the contrary of MorningStar's opinions regarding how much file-sharing is actually "costing" the music industry.

MorningStar · 06-04-2006 02:47PM

Boggle wrote:

Your losing the run of yourself lad. Read my posts before replying please - did I say it wasn't illegal? No. What I told you is why people do it. Then I questioned the assertions of the record companies that it was hurting their business. None of which were deemed worthy of comment...

I did you haven't gone back and read mine about copyright. I didn't say you said it was legal so why are you saying I did?

Boggle wrote:

I could if the RIAA had that info available... or decided to release it.

To be honest - even if they could tell me that they were only breaking even my answer would be that they need to re-examine their costs as at those prices I will not buy but will (maybe) listen to radio instead.

So the answer is no you don't know and have no idea of what is fair yet claim you want a fair price that you have no bases for. I think you will find many record companies will let you know how much it cost to at least record an album. Have you even looked?

Boggle wrote:

:eek: This has always been your arguing style - refuse to answer a question instead liking throwing "scandalous" remarks around. I remember when we discussed houses or such - you kept dodging/ignoring every question, instead choosing to repeat the same argument until people just got bored. Please don't do it here... don't have much time in work to be browsing so don't wanna waste it going in circles.

Ask a question after you read what I have said. Any you feel I have not asnwered list in numbered form and I will answer them and I will tell you which post I answered them already in if I have already done so.

MorningStar · 06-04-2006 02:50PM

Lemming wrote:

I will reply to this thread later today. With links to the contrary of MorningStar's opinions regarding how much file-sharing is actually "costing" the music industry.

That is impossible as I haven't stated a "cost" to the music industry.It is stealing plain and simple.

RIAA Suggests MIT Student Drop Out Of School To Pay Fine

Comments