Nigel Spencer wrote:
"...are you honestly saying you've NEVER copied an album for a friend or recieved a copy? "

I suspect most of us have been guilty of breaking the law now and again. For example, there are very few who drive cars who can swear they have NEVER exceeded the legal speed limit. On the other hand, most of us would not drive 80 MPH past a school where the speed limit is posted as 25 MPH. Those who violate the law to a great extent really ought to be prosecuted more severely than the occasional minor offender. That does not mean the minor offender is "legal", and maybe not even "right", but it's probably not worth worrying about. At some point, though, the reasons for the laws become apparent and it is important to enforce them.

To think of an issue as entirely binary, black-or-white, right-or-wrong, can lead to polarization and extremism. (You can see how well THAT works by looking at some of the politics in the world today - but that's a whole different discussion).

The Recording Industry is taking the extreme stance of "All unauthorized copying must be stopped". Some Internet users are taking the extreme stance that "All information, and especially all entertainment, should be freely available to everyone with no restrictions or cost". Somewhere in between is a reasonable, rational, and fair balance. Organizations like Creative Commons are trying to encourage development, definition, and use of that middle ground.

I am also recalling a thread from a while back on "Ethical Collecting". Most participants in that discussion seemed to agree that a song should not be collected & published without at least asking permission of the Source. If the Blogger who prompted this thread had followed similar ethics, we might not need to have this discussion.

Just my two bits' worth, as always.

Val