It has been my observation over the years that media companies have to be dragged against their will into giving customers what they want. And this often means forcing the issue by using alternative methods that eventually push media companies in the right direction.DanTimis wrote:Unfortunately, the record companies are not smart enough to offer something like this. There was a time when you could go to record store, choose the tracks you wanted and have a custom CD made on the spot. But, you had to pay for it. On top of that, there should be discounts for quantity.
A song on iTunes is about $1. If you choose 10 songs, it would be $10. If you could get it half price for 120 copies, it would $5 per CD, which is probably close to what you are paying for one slice of wedding cake. If I wanted to do this for my wedding and I couldn't do it legally, I would be really mad at the record companies, but I would not break the law.
If it hadn't been for tens of millions of songs being distributed illegally via P2P networks, we still wouldn't have reasonably priced, large catalogue online music sites licensed by record companies. They were making far more money on CDs, which never dropped in price despite the economy of scale growth of pressing plants that should have caused a significant reduction in costs. So, the record companies refused to acknowledge the march of technology, and customers simply went around them -- illegal as it might have been. As soon as record companies licensed their catalogs at reasonable prices, the music-buying public became customers. But without Napster et al., none of this would have happened.
Actually, I think most people know what the letter of the law is, but they may disagree with it and do what they believe is fair and reasonable. The media companies lobbied for the DMCA, and it is all about them and not about us. Fair use is the last thing they want their customers to have.I don't think I am black and white...I am mostly appalled by the lack of awareness. This whole example about the wedding started with me saying that we should educate the public. If someone would tell me that they were at a wedding and every guest received a custom CD, I would still think it was wrong, but I would not be appalled...But, returning to my original point that got lost in the debate: honest people who would not steal a wallet full of cash, make copies of CDs, DVDs, and software all the time, completely unaware that they are breaking the law.
You know why prohibition didn't work? Because the middle class didn't ask for it, didn't support it and didn't obey it. This is basically what is going on with copying CDs and DVDs (and software for backup or for a second computer). The general public -- the customers of software publishers and media companies -- want fair use, and they're going to get it one way or another.
In my opinion it's not dishonest and its not unethical if they've already paid for the content, and as long as it's for personal use. Yes, it is illegal, but that's not the only criterion by which to judge these activities. The DMCA was paid for by media company lobbyists. It may be the law, but it's not fair to consumers as written. In fact, a comment period for reconsideration of the DMCA is starting on November 2 at http://www.copyright.gov/1201/comment_forms/index.html, and anyone who believes it's time to take back fair use should be commenting to the U.S. Patent Office.