I see this as a much less complex issue than the posters above. If you download music, listen to it, and do not pay the artist or distributor for doing it you are a thief. This idea that this is all a creative activity and all humans have a right to share in it is absurd. Music is an intangible that results from persons creativity and hard work and they need to be paid for it. Would you download a document, image, or software program that was clearly owned by a party and not in the public domain that was intended for commercial sale and claim you had a right to it? would you steal a patented product design or novel and download it and consider it ethical? If so, you are a thief. Napster is much more involved in facilitating this crime (theft) than a money launderer, a pimp, or the owner of a crack house. All of these people are criminals and the owners of Napster are too.
Feelings on Napster?
Hi, Since this is in part a forum about music, I'll put this statement and question on the table. In the past few months, I've begun to use Napster online. I'll look through the forum for reccomendations on good albums and tracks, then I'll download it on Napster, take a listen and, if I like it, purchase the album. My opinion is that Napster is really opening up accessibility to music for alot of people, allowing them to try new things that before they wouldn't have access to or simply wouldn't be prepared to invest in. It's helped expand my own horizons I know and I think it's good for music overall. Any opinions?