Lebon14 wrote:If you put something public, you can't stop people for what they are doing. If you put it on public, you take all responsabilities going along. It's like putting an iPod, in the middle of downtown 12pm, on a chair, with a sign behind "Don't Touch My iPod". I'm not too sure if the iPod will stay there... same thing for music on MySpace.
I think your analogy is flawed. I agree with the notion leaving your iPod out in public - but a closer analogy would simply be leaving the iPod out with a pair of headphones with the invitation "please feel free to listen".
You are then going on to admit that you are basically the same as the thief who takes the iPod, copies the songs off it, and goes on to distribute them to everyone else far and wide, well in excess of the original spirit of why those songs were put out for you to listen to in the first place.
While I will admit the idea of offering the full songs up on MySpace was a tad naive (given the nature of the internet and the people who use it), ripping the songs
and more crucially flaunting that fact by posting them publicly for other people to grab (though I'm not going to indict you specifically for this) is plain rude, and at worst criminal. They were uploaded there in good spirit by Newfield, with the intention that they be listened to there and only there, and that people would purchase the legal version on SEB 184 for personal listening.
Nomake Wan's argument about recording from a concert is equally flawed, for much the same reasons as the idea of taking the MySpace player, ripping the songs, and posting them to everyone else. If you rip the songs/record the concert for your own listening benefit, no one is going to be wise to what you're doing. It's the
distribution that's the problem. That's why the heck
copyright exists in the first place:
"At its most general, it is literally "the right to copy", but also gives the copyright holder the right to be credited for the work, to determine who (if anyone) can perform it or adapt it to other forms, to benefit financially from the work, and other related rights."
So Nomake Wan's argument about recording a Frankie Valli concert has the exact same problem - whether you do it to listen to personally is up to you - technically the copyright still applies but it's very difficult to apply to personal listening - but the minute you distribute it you are violating the copyright that exists on Frankie Valli's work - his rights to distribute his music in whatever manner, to his (ultimately financial) benefit.
Regardless of whether you or anyone else ripped these Delta songs to listen to on your own PC in the meantime, by posting them to other websites you are encouraging (nay, giving full instructions) to everyone else on how to obtain them and thereby skip out the purchase on SEB altogether, and you are doing it in complete disregard for the copyright law that allows Delta to decide how their tracks should be made available.
So thanks the actions of a few, the many now miss out and have to make do with 30-second clips instead.
Fair play to Delta, to be honest - you give anyone an inch, and they take a mile.