The Music Media Industry

When I was in middle school, the biggest way to get music for free was a website named Limewire. Nothing was more exciting than to be able to hear a song on the radio then go home and download it to our desktops. Also cool, was the fact that if one of us didn’t have a song, our friend could simply “burn” it onto a c.d. for us. That was the only way we knew how to get music, aside from going out and buying the whole album. Apple’s iTunes was just starting out and iPods were just being created. Limewire was the way to go. Little did we know that Limewire was illegal and costing singers, songwriters, labels, and everyone associated with just one song, huge amounts of money.

For many years illegal file sharing and music swapping has been going on. Two very popular cases are the MGM Studios, Inc. v. Grokster case and the A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster case. Both cases differ in many ways however they also have similarities. A lot of music and other sorts of entertainment are being distributed for free all over the internet. What some people do not think of are the consequences that will be faced if they get caught. Not only is the distributor at risk for getting caught but those of us that download the software illegally can be charged.

Others believe that the music should not be on the market for the public to access at all. Many believe that censorship should not be allowed at all because it

I also believe that if you are a true fan of a certain music artist, then you should want to pay the money for their music and help support them in their music career. Downloading songs for free is disrespectful to music artists and takes away the meaning of hard work they put into all of their musical work. I would tell any friend of mine who supported illegal downloading that it’s illegal and if they really wanted to support that music artist, then they would buy the music and prove their support and passion for music by paying for it.

Is wrong because you wouldn’t walk into a CD store and walk out with $15 album and expect nothing to happen. Well that is what exactly what you do when you download the album for free.

The Internet already makes it easy for the computer savvy individuals to copy music illicitly. Widespread file sharing has led content providers and distributors of content to view their customers as growing threats to their survival. Anything we can watch, read, or listen to over our computers can be copied. If Americans are willing to steal intellectual property, and if increased access speeds will enable us to do so almost effortlessly, then a large part of our entertainment-based economy is in peril. Napster showed that people who wouldn’t even consider shoplifting would readily download pirated music. Just as people have less incentive to work if high tax rates appropriate the fruits of their labors, so media companies would have less

The question then became “Just because we can get the music we want without paying for it, should we?” (Tyson, 2000, p.1). This issue of illegal downloads, which is also referred to as piracy, has been a hot topic ever since the introduction of Napster. According to Recording Industry Association of America “In the decade since peer-to-peer (p2p) file-sharing site Napster emerged in 1999, music sales in the U.S. have dropped 47 percent, from $14.6 billion to $7.7 billion” (RIAA, 2014).

The internet is the one media that brings up the most controversy in bands spreading their music. Whether they promote it or not their music is downloaded for free on the internet. Most bands do not like that their music is downloaded for free, but they can’t do much to stop it. In a way downloading music for free could bring the musicians even more money. If a person likes one of the songs they downloaded off of the internet they may be inclined to buy the entire album or at least the single. After the person buys the latest album they may even buy earlier albums from the same artist if they like the music enough. The internet has

Producers of musical content cannot undo the adverse effects that piracy has had on the industry. Because of the internet and the way individuals have manipulated it to obtain music, many people are unwilling to change their habits. Here lies the issue between the producer and the consumer. Acts like the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) and PROTECT Intellectual Property Act (PIPA) work against the incentive of many consumers by telling them that they cannot do what maximizes their utility. Producers are thus working against the likings of the consumer. This is wrong.

Copyright is a problem. It always has been and it always will be. Musicians deserve credit for their music, I agree, but that does not mean that music should not be available online for free. It would be efficient, helpful, and easy, if music was available online for free.

The average person wouldn't even consider walking into a music store and stealing a CD, however, with today's technology getting music without paying for it is so easy it barely seems illegal. Copyright infringement is a huge ethical issue going on right now. From downloading movies and music from peer-to-peer programs as well as various websites to being able to stream a movie at the click of a button without a copy ever being saved on the computer it's so simple, anyone could get addicted to doing it. For some of these reasons many argue that copyright infringement is a moral thing to do, but on the other hand others believe it is just as immoral as stealing. When comparing and contrasting reasons for why copyright infringement is moral and why it is immoral I think when it comes down to it it is stealing and would obviously be immoral.

No sooner had single light turned on green than rainbow poped up, and the unknown sound waved around it. That rings familar: it is downloading a music file that becomes our life. We know not only it is very useful and entertains us but sometimes can be illegal if done without paying for copyright. Honestly speaking, although informed of the two sides of a coin, we are inclined to the bright side of benefit; so are students at Pennsylvania State University in the United States. They also know downloading illegally is against the uni rule and the state law, but play on it due to an easy online access and the fact that many of them already enjoy a media file for taking, thus think it of not being immoral. Although it rings true as what brings

Ever since 18-year-old Shawn Fanning created Napster in his Northeastern University dorm room in 1999, downloading and sharing music online has become one of the most popular things to do on the Internet today. But why wouldn't it? Getting all your favorite songs from all your favorite artists for free, who wouldn't want to start sharing music? The answer to that question are the people who feel that stealing from the music industry is not morally right, because that is exactly what every person who shares music is doing. People who download music think it's something they can get away with but now it might be payback time to a lot of those people.

We cannot stop people from sharing sound and video files, any more than we could stop people from taping movies and giving it to a friend twenty 25 years ago (. It's not a violation of U.S. copyright law to make a personal copy of a copyrighted work (study of Napster trial/ Feb 23, 2001.) From this statement it clearly shows that downloading music is legitimate, and I state that I mean it represents all what the downloaders want. We do not want to get the music and sell it as our own, it is used for personal status to listen to.

Ever since the start of illegal music downloading there has been an ongoing debate. As with any controversy, there are those whose positions stand at one end of the spectrum or the other and also those who are moderate or nonchalant. Many believe that downloading a song without paying for it is not only illegal, but also immoral. None-the less, people continue to download songs, rationalizing that the record companies are getting what they deserve after years of overpriced CD's or that the artists won't really miss the money. Some people are not sure what to make of the situation, sympathizing in some respects with either side. There are several proposed solutions to this problem, but it has become obvious that there is not easy or clear