HR 4077 needs to be "Mashed"

So, it ok to download music as long as it is for small time time bands, not the ones supported by huge companies?

And I do borrow music from friends, occasionally. But like I said, I buy way more music than anybody I know, so they really are not often a great source for new music. And yeah, if there if they do offer some of their music up online I sure as hell do take advantage of it. A lot do not, plus I usually want to sample a larger portion of what is on a CD. Just being able to hear one song does not do me much good if that is the only good song on the CD.

"So, it ok to download music as long as it is for small time time bands"

If it's part of the licensing agreement, then yeah...some people encourage it.

"Just being able to hear one song does not do me much good if that is the only good song on the CD."

But that's how a lot of game demos work, unfortunately. It isn't unique to the music industry.

Anyway, if you buy more music because you download it, great. I'm glad (not sarcastic here). But the fact of the matter is that most people don't. Most people get the music for free, often having the intention of buying it, but then saying "hey, I got what I wanted so no need to pay for it". And maybe the RIAA sometimes goes after the wrong person (like if they went after you). But that doesn't change the fact that they have a right to profit, even if they get paid obscene amounts of money. I don't think most NFL players deserve what they make (and I love the sport). iF IT BOTHERED ME THAT MUCH, THOUGH, THE ONLY OPTION i HAVE TO CHANGE THAT IS TO NOT PAY THEIR SALARY (aw stupid caps lock, not rewriting that). I pay their salary, after all. WE (as in the consumers) do. If people wanted to stop the RIAA, they would stop listening to the music under their umbrella. Pirating it doesn't do anything. Just gives them more money, because I'm not going to stop them from taking the guilty parties away ;p What right do I have to do that?

Ok, Ill agree with you, people who simply pirate music are wrong. Steps are needed to prevent this. But this is not the way to do it. Attacking the people who LIKE your music is just wrong, in any sense. The problem of pirating is indicative of an overall larger problem that has been present in the industry for some time. That most people do not have the option to listen to a wide variety, that they get the same little package all across the country. Yeah, lots of people download for the sole intent of stealing, but I guarentee JUST as many download just for exposure, and most over lap somewhere in between. I support the downloading of music because it will eventually lead to the destruction of the RIAA, but not because people are downloading instead of buying. People will eventually figure out there is other stuff out there, but people are not going to figure out overnight that "Hey, all these music they are giving us really is not so good...there is some amazing stuff out there". And downloading is the first step in a process that will eventually lead to the appreciation of a much wider selection of music, and music as a whole will profit, not some damned corporation. That is what I want. And this bill would more then hinder that.

Might my idea be radical? Probably a little illegal too. But like anything that has been done great in this country the goverment has initially opposed it, and somebody had to break the law to show that the law is unjust.

" People will eventually figure out there is other stuff out there, but people are not going to figure out overnight that "Hey, all these music they are giving us really is not so good...there is some amazing stuff out there"."

I can definitely relate to that...I say that about games all the time. But I still don't understand how downloading music tied to the RIAA destroys the RIAA. Sharing music that isn't well known and not tied to them WOULD because it spreads...but like I said before, that isn't illegal (at least, not if whoever made the music says it's not).

And for me, the best way to stick it to the man so to speak would be to not have anything to do with them.

It does not destroy the RIAA. But you seem to think that most people make a distinction between RIAA music and Independent music. They do not. Hell, I am really into music and I do not know sometimes whether a label is under the RIAA umbrella or not. People just share music, and if they are afraid that sharing music will get them arrested then they are not going to do it all together. Therefore everybody, especially small independent bands that really depend on the interenet for exposure, are going to be hurt the most.

There is a reason there is a larger underground music movement going on right now, and that it is continuing to shift in that direction. It is the internet.

OK, I can agree with that. That makes a lot of sense. Unfortuately, though, these people downloading music are downloading stuff like 50 Cent and blah blah blah, and NOT the lesser known stuff not covered in their umbrella. And I would certainly hope that any attack on them by the RIAA wouldn't stop them from what they are legally allowed to do. It is just kind of wierd when I see, for example, some signs around campus saying things like "Do you want your voice to be heard on your rights to download whatever music you want whenever you want?" How do you answer Yes to that when you don't have that right. It's just that most people are mad they can't download 50 Cent. It's all about the G-Unit ;p

But hey, good point. I can attest to that. THAT is something I can identity with and use to mash ;p