Post #186303 by Swanky on Tue, Sep 13, 2005 9:36 AM

That argument falls completely flat on it's face with one simple fact: Used record and CD sales. Loss of sound quality: Zero. Revenue to the original artist and record industry: zero.

The time and expense required to record an LP to a Cd is also far greater than the old days. Recopying may be faster, but no one ever actually sat and watched a recording happen. You turn it on and watch TV or whatever.

On the copying point, there is a lot of precident for allowing copying. Radio stations broadcast and copy music all the time. It's a fair use clause. There would be plenty of room to put this sort of sampler trading under the same "benefit equals loss" paradigm. Certianly in terms of out of print material, there is no loss at all. Zero revenue is being generated in any form of music sale, so no argument can be made of loss of revenue.

Maybe a 1PM meet by the pool would keep the legal worries away.

There are issues in all this, but not for us swapping music at Hukilau. My opinion is that the industry is just being a big bully rather than try to adapt their business model to changes in technology and society. Billy Mure was selling burned copies of his records last year, how does that fit in? All this is for big business and other people to worry about. Remeber kids, the RIAA only sues people who share a lot of music online, not those that download a lot of music online.