Anti-Napster people are missing the point
Aug 12 '01
The Bottom Line I think Napster should be allowed to be around. IT IS NOT THE FAULT OF NAPSTER FOR PEOPLE SELLING THE DOWNLOADED MATERIAL. IT'S THE DOWNLOADERS OWN FAULT!
I loved Napster! I could be able to download a variety of songs, and get it on my own personally burned CD for only $2! Now, thanks to the misunderstanding and greediness of the music businessmen, we honest Napster users are forced to suffer based upon a "fixed false belief" as my father coins illogical thinking.
First of all, is the claim that "Napster users are freeloaders." Gee that's interesting the Anti-Napster people say that. Since I own my computer, along with the CD's I bought, then there is no legal force telling me that I can't share files with people, is there? The only time there are legal issues are if I sell the downloaded material. For example, I have written a 134 page book so far. Now, if I sell you my book, and you decide to write your own book with some of my work then that is fine. It's fine as LONG AS you credit it towards me, and you don't sell it to other people. There plain and simple.
The book example reminds me of my next claim, which I will support with argument(that's reasoning to us philosophy majors:) If I can record something off HBO or TNT tonight, then that is cool. No legal harm done. I am paying the cable company to provide me entertainment. Now, I would however be breaking the law if I decided to SELL you the movie that I had recorded off HBO. It's alright if I record it and you make a copy of it on your own tape, but once money is exchanged, then that is when we have broken a law.
Now, the only thing I disagree with pro-Napster people is the claim that "Yeah! It's our time. Those musicians have been screwing us for years." That is not the proper attitude. Again, we haven't broken any laws for downloading the songs. We would only be lawbreakers if we SOLD our downloaded material. I may be contradicting myself here, but it is not right to just refuse to not pay someone just because they are a monopoly. That's called theft-that is when you have obviously broken a law.
Going back to my claim, the Napster company should not be liable just because of the people who sell the downloaded material. The people should be. I know some people say "Well, the FBI and musicians can't tell who's doing it, so therefore we need to stop the whole thing." Please. That type of fallacious thinking is called "Fallacy of the Beard"-a term I learned in General Logic. When you think "Oh, since we can't figure 'A' apart from 'B', therefore you can't tell at all."
Let's say, that many people are suddenly selling the movies that they recorded off HBO. We don't know who they are, but their have never been claims to shut down HBO, as far as I know. So, why are people getting lazy with wanting to stop Napster for the mere fact that they can't find the culprits for the people selling the downloaded material? This "one bad apple spoils a whole bunch" thinking has really gotta go.
I may just be an ignorant 23 year old, but if we can record movies and television shows and not get arrested, then what is the harm with Napster? Many of the Anti-Napster people have overlooked some rather common sense to their claims they make. That's just my opinion though.
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Epinions.com ID:
matthewn
|
|
Location: For me to know and you to find out!
Reviews written: 266
Trusted by: 49 members
|
|
|
© 1999-2009 Shopping.com, Inc.