The first (and only) RIAA lawsuit against a music sharer goes to jury today. Let’s dish!?

1.It's really not. I remember as a kid taping songs off the radio because I couldn't afford to go and buy the cassette. As an adult, I still am faced with that fact that downloading songs on itunes for 99 cents or buying an album at target for $13 on sale is still an expensive proposition. If you figure that modern MP3 players are intended to hold tens of thousands of songs, how are we supposed to afford filling them?

2.The founder of MP3.com brought up this same issue a while back and no one really paid him much attention. I think that what we need to be aware of is that for the first time in history, we have the ability to instantaneously duplicate and disminate music, films, books, you name it. I think there are serious abuses on both ends. I think of digital music much like a car. Just because you bought it doesn't mean you can drive 100 mph without a seatbelt while drinking. There are certain limitations that we as a society need to have on individual property. As far as downloading a "replacement" song, when was the last time the record industry replaced a scratched CD or broken cassette for free?

3. I totally agree. My big thing is that I don't download music that I would buy. If my favorite band comes out with a new album, I'll go to the store and buy it. If I have a cherished song from my teenage years, I'll go on itunes and pay for it. But if it's some song that I heard on the radio today, and will be sick of by next week, I'm not going to pay for it. As an amature musician, I feel it's more important for someone to hear my song and like it than to pay me for it. I think the RIAA should have to march each band or artist into court and make them tell about how this one person illegally downloading music has ruined their lives and careers. If a band came to me and said "we can't afford to tour or make a new album because everyone downloaded our music and so we had no record sales" then I could understand. But as it is, the overwhelming majority of illegally downloaded music is mass-produced trash that's here today and gone tomorrow. The music industry is just pissing themselves because we're not mindlessly handing over cash anymore.

4.You would think so, but since these are civil cases, the jury isn't as bound by the whole "reasonable doubt" thing. Really, I'd like to see them try these cases in criminal court, since it's a violation of federal law. I don't think we'd see the same types of ridiculous damages and maybe three months of jail time would be enough to scare people straight. The thing is, most people aren't doing this maliciously, so it's just proving once and for all that the music industry isn't about the audience, it's about the money.

Somewhat sad to see her lose but it was a sure thing really, though it was something like 2k+ a song she will need to pay that is just wrong as it is just an insane amount for a song.

It does seem true that the RIaa does not want to change with the times and just stay back. They will file against anyone, just to seemly try to scary you into not doing it.

I can;t see what they do is not wrong, they have to be spying on you or get a search warrent at some point as they even said she changed out her hardrive.

I guess the bottom is if you want to DL music for "free" need to use a different name, add a secondary harddrive, and be carefully. Also heard if you only DL and not share there is little they can do as they can't access you libary and even know what you have on your computer.

Seems about right as the RIAA would never know what you have unless they were to hack your computer or do something along thoselines

I'm really torn. As a former music retailer I can understand where the RIAA is coming from. How can 5000 or more (I don't know exact figures) people downloading a song rather than buying the CD not be damaging to the pocketbook?

But the retailers for many years have sold CD's at a seemingly high price. The profit margin for a music store is not alot. The money's got to be going somewhere.

Then again, the RIAA has to adapt to new technology. They will not be able to stop progress.

I think technology is going to direct which way the music business goes. I think these lawsuits are probably only temporary roadblocks.

Very touchy situation.

Well for one thing it is harder from them to catch you making copies at home. But on the internet you leave your address. So the moral to this is Don't Share Music OVER THE INTERNET!!!!

Great commentary here: http://arstechnica.com/authors.ars/I+Palindrome+I