| Geoff - I'm a member of an advanced society that is also a modern republic, and I find property rights to be held in far too high a regard as compared to human rights. Please don't say "the people believe this" until you can get some statistics to back you up, 'cause you ain't speaking for me.
What's worse, your idea of what the arguments are against intellectual property in the form of creative arts is a slight bit mislead.
Getting exposure to small-time artists is a good thing, because they rarely have the opportunity to do so through official measures - ie: the radio, and advertisements paid by the producer. Why? Because the producers want the largest amount of profit for the money spent, which means they look to promote artists that pander to the lowest common denominator. Which means that Johnny Garage Band or Jamie Indie Rock don't get their music played outside the chump change bar scene.
What's worse, $19 is quite a lot to spend on a CD that you can't preview, especially if only 60 cents actually go to the artist. I might as well mail them a dollar. Tower found out that "listening stations" don't cut it. Apple found out that Apple.com does cut it. Especially since you don't have to buy the whole CD. Why did Apple do such a thing? Because Napster and Kazaa and Gnutella and WinMX and all those others proved how many people thought they were getting gypped by the "charge what the market will bear" people from the RIAA.
Not to mention it's not too nice to sue your consumer base.
. . . whenever any government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute a new government, laying its foundations on such principles and organizing its powers in such forms as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness. |