Feds to audiophiles: You're all pirates now

A Digital File is a "thing".

Incorrect. A digital file is not a "thing." That would be like saying that an idea is a physical object. The file is an organization of 1's and 0's that your computer can interpret as a sound. A digital file is no more a "thing" than a song is a thing.

One point you're missing is that the owner of the file (the artist) will now NOT be able to sell that file to whomever you give it to (or to you).

Nope. It is incorrect to say that the artist cannot sell that file to me if I already have it free illegally. Even if I had downloaded the file illegally, I could still go to iTunes and download it legally if I felt so inclined. It's true that someone may not feel so inclined, but it's false to say that they can't.

The points above are exactly the reason we have copyright law in the first place.

-Dusty

Dusty, really, what are 1s and 0's if they're not things?
Are you suggesting they are "nothing". This is getting deep.
Perhaps some Philosophists might have some input here.

Hi - I don't have time to debate too much more about this, as my wife keeps asking me, "What are you doing there...?" In brief, the legal understanding of these issues here is very lacking.

1. "The organization of 1's and 0's that your computer can interpret as a sound" IS a thing. I can locate it on your hard drive. The fact that it can be copied and transmitted electronically doesn't change that.

Selected quotes from Duke's Law and Technology Review concerning exactly this subject:

¶ 3 Section 101 of the 1976 Copyright Act defines a phonorecord as a "[M]aterial object in which sounds are fixed and from which the sounds can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device."

¶ 12 Fixation may seem like a hurdle considering an Mp3 file is composed of ones and zeros, but this hurdle is quickly crossed. Unlike a shower rendition of a song that is captured only by my ears, a digital file is actually a series of positively- and negatively-charged ions trapped in a magnetic source, be it a floppy diskette or a hard disk drive. ****The file is thus fixed in a material object****, as it will exist for as long as the storage medium exists (absent accidental erasure by another magnetic source).

The standard of an MP3 or other digital file as a physical object has been well argued and is totally accepted under current law. There are even more explicit definitions here:
http://digital-law-online.info/lpdi1.0/treatise5.html

------------------------------------------

2. A "reasonable third party" or "reasonable bystander" viewing the fact that someone was given the music file for free would not expect the artist to be likely to then consummate a sale to that person. The fact that some future hypothetical transaction is not physically impossible is irrelevant, legally or morally.

Again, I don't claim to never copy stuff myself - but I think it's imporatnat to be honest with yourself about the issues involved. It is clearly a form of theft. The injury to the artist may be extremely small in each instance, but theft it is.

Now if you may excuse me, I have some CD's to burn tonight....

Agreed-
mp3 and audiophile do not belong in the same sentence.

Very interesting thread.
I can't help but think how sad it is the old days are gone forever.
Has anyone noticed how rapidly the world has changed, especially in the last decade?
We no longer sit at the dinner table with the famiglia.
Children don't play stick ball any more.
Internet rather than the stoop is the source of entertainment and mingling.
It doesn't seem like it really matters much, but it does.
The next generation is being raised by greedy degenerates that display their sheer stupidity to sway a young audience to watch their stuff on tv or the net. Without any scrupples whatsoever. There are consequences for the messages conveyed from this so called entertainment.
Life imitates, that is so obvious in all circles of life. Just look at the parishoners behavior. Jealousy and possessiveness, just like the church. Have no g*d before me. Must be a weak g*d to depend on our loyalty, and "he" created everything. The religious institutes can't even heal cancer, but they know how to drive fear and guilt. Manipulative the same as gov. And the population here still believes. It all ties together. A person is formed by the upbringing in the early stage of life. Take a look at cartoons a big influence in our upbringing, it is deliberately written with events not resembling reality. This is to create a society lacking logic and truth. That's why so many still believe some one walked on water or built a canoe that kept animals from eating each other or the hosts. And there was 40 days worth of food, wow I believe a ha. This way we are easily tricked into conforming to their idea of life for the paupers. Is it 90% of the pop. will settle for sterile food? Budweiser outsells all belgian beers grouped together.
Back to the piracy issues:
So what are the music industry execs losing? The income that should rightly go to the musicians or their lavish life styles. If any one is stealing it is the music industry. Funny the ones who cry theif are the biggest theifs themselves.
On the other hand, how much value do we bestow on something we don't pay for. If something really had value for us in our heart we would cherish it and give our undivided attention.
What does music mean to us?
We stand and solute a flag that serves the rich and unites people to say I am this and if you are not screw you!
But music, beautiful music deserves our attention.
We have been lied to from day one by schools church and media or government same thing.