RIAA wins case in Minnesota?

Originally Posted by SuperNova

Or buy the music you want to buy.

Like I said people, stealing is still stealing. iTunes is great, and I don't mind paying 99 cents a single. But again doesn't mean I support the RIAA or frivolous lawsuits either.

Originally Posted by Pangalin

When you walk into a rental shop and walk out with an unpaid-for movie, the shop loses something. They no longer have that copy of that movie. They cannot rent it to anyone else; they cannot sell it, it's gone. That is direct harm. However, torrenting is merely making a copy, which regardless of the morality of that is still definitively less harmful than outright TAKING something.

This brings us 'round to the argument that it's STILL somehow the same as stealing, since you're um er theoretically taking money away from them that you might theoretically have spent later. In reality this is not the nature of things. The vast majority, I suspect, of torrented items are ones that would NOT be otherwise purchased outright (mostly because a great plurality of torrent users are not precisely wealthy). You don't "lose a sale" to someone with no interest in purchase and no money. It's an inane concept.

Saying that making a copy of something that you would never otherwise purchase, in a way that does nothing to directly harm the product or its creator... saying this is the same as just walking out of a store with an armful of goods is wildly disingenuous.

Pretty much.

Jam it back in, in the dark.