Why I download music…

Uhh ... because you own the physical compact disc???

And because they don't want to buy it back because they couldn't resell it for the same amount?

That's not the same as owning the actual MUSIC.

You do own it. The CD that is. Like if you buy a book, you OWN the book.

You don't own the rights to the actual story content though.

LOL, that's most mainstream artists now. They all suck except for a standout track or 2.

I rob banks because that's where the money is.

That's something I love iTunes for. It actually encourages artists to make albums devoid of filler and crap. Because, now, we can just go buy that one single and not shell out the $15USD for the fluff around it.

The sound quality on iTunes is pretty good. Google "Hymn" for a program to strip the DRM and make them able to play on anything.

Its an object, and If i want to cut up a picaso that I buy and make a paper machet ninja claw with the pieces I can. I own an object with media on it. The music industry is trying to say what I can do with something that I bought.
In my house, on my own time, with my own tools. And I don't care how many Orrin Hatches they buy, I can still do what I feel like with my own shit.

Yes, this is my point as well. They are stepping over the bounds of what I can do with the content of what they sold me.

First off, a picasso is not a good analogy. They're one of a kind. You, owning a CD, have a mass produced object.

And sure, you can do whatever you want. Some of it's covered under fair use, and you're a small enough fish that nobody will notice anyway. Even I break DRM and rip CDs, and hopefully after this whole Sony debacle labels will think twice about trying it.

But start testing your "ownership" of said media in a big way, like making copies and selling them online en masse, or make a hit song sampling it without permission, and you'll see just how much of it you "own".

This is really interesting. I hope this thread is here when I get back from tour. I'm writing a Ph.D on the legal implications of P2P music filesharing and part of it is analysing the mindset of why people download. Feel free to contact me with any thoughts.

PS: DVDs are apparantly being phased out in 3 years and CDs in 8 years to be replaced by HD technology, which admittedly is better quality as it doesn't need psychoacoustics as in CDs and so all the frequency range is represented and it will be like listening to master tapes apparantly. I'm gutted though at the prospect of potentially having to replace my music collection.

thank you, willie sutton.

just for the record, i download music because i like it and it's free for me and i can expose myself to as much devil music as possible.

downloading if for sinners

not to mention a lot of underground artists that wanna go mainstream so bad they start producing shit
(I'm lookin' at YOU 80% of metalcore bands since the return of Headbangers Ball)

I'm old fashioned and I want hard goods -- I'm one of those people who wants to be able to hold the album in my hands, put the cd in the cd player, look at the artwork, read the lyrics, and experience the album the way the artist intended. Downloading mp3s (legally and illegally) just doesn't cut it for me.

I will admit though that I think downloading is great for bootlegs, rarities, and out of print albums that you wouldn't be able to get your hands on otherwise without an awful lot of effort.

Obviously.

So what was your point?

It keeps changing.

Its not "your shit" though, you own the compact disk that the media is on. the ,copywrite is clearly stated on the back, just because you have bought the disk doesnt mean you have the legal right to copy or potentially distribute the music.
using my band as an example, it clearly says on the inside sleeve "The copywrite in this sound recording is owned by freaky fortnight", not "the copywrite in this sound recording is owned my freaky fortnight.....and whoever buys this e.p and feels like copying it"