Well what can i say to this the answer is pretty straight forward... FREE This is the major reason y people still use it and also even if its bad quality users can use P2P to download a sound engenering program and they can change the poor quality to a standard that is listenable.... For me if i find it a really good song and the artist has release a few good songs then i might buy their album also i buy the album if i think i can use their track of music within the remixes i create for my dance performances, u never know what is possible....

riaa= choobs!!! i download....i don't share hehe. y don't they just bak off, i hered more cds are sold then illiagaly downloaded is that true?

I think I read it here somewhere that so called illegal downloaders are also the highest buyers of legal music. In the US that averages around $5.45 per month spent on legal music. Those who do not download spend a little under $2/month on legal music. Based on those figures the more illegal downloaders that exist the higher legal music sales will be. Logic then dictates that the music industry should embrace P2P then sit back and count the increased sales. Unfortunately the RIAA and it's affiliates think differently so will continue to shoot themselves in the foot until there is only a stump left and they simply fall over.

hopefully, this is a sign that as this next generation takes places of power in society, they will be able to knock the RIAA down a notch or two and put them in their place. i'm starting to like the looks of the future.

it will take awhile as still alot of old guard out there!!

yeah, but i'm not too worried. most of them are so inept....just look at their track record. they've gotten a whole .001% of filesharers so far, and their moving at the speed of molasses. XD

now the radio stations are joining the RIAA and the MPAA about complaining about online music. Radio stations are seeing net radio and services like yahoo music and rhapsody (et al) as direct competition, add in satellite radio and the radio moguls don't like the look of the future anymore than the RIAA or the MPAA. Understandably people hate losing money... heck everyone on this site would agree that they themselves hate to lose money. The problem they face though isn't how to NOT lose money instead it is how to MAKE money under the new tech and creating new business models to do so. Any business that does not move forward into the future is going to be stuck in the past, this is basic knowledge from any Business 101 class. The U.S steel industry was once the world's leader but it became bloated and continued to use outdated factories, methods and models. Eventually Big Steel was govt. subsidized with tariffs etc to the point that there isn't any Big Steel anymore. It's relevant to point out though that New Steel is turning profits through modernization of their factories and business models. Just like big steel, the RIAA sat around through a decade of explosive progress in tech and internet and did nothing. Content to retain their outdated systems, secure in their delusions about their self worth, self importance, and infallibility. Now they realize that THEIR free ride is about to end. That their extinction WAS clearly written on the walls of their corner offices but they refused to pay attention to it. And in their desperation to stave of the future which is here now, a future they disregarded and discounted, until they can figure out how to deal with it to THEIR advantage they attack anything and anyone they see as a potential threat. First is was filesharing, now it's burnable cd-r's... next it will be dvd's, hdd's memory cards etc etc I'm just waiting to hear where I send the flowers to....

Isn't it interesting that the RIAA's biggest argument against copyright infringement is that the artists lose money, but I have yet to hear a single artist complain about losing money? The original artist does not get 99 cents per track. If they're lucky, they get a tenth of that or so. So, when around 35% (the figure was somewhere in that ballpark wasn't it?) of music is pirated, who do you think is going to complain? The record company moochers who do nothing and get 90% of the money, or the creators, who only get 10%? The record companies are the biggest waist of money in the music industry, and people are really starting to notice, so the RIAA is trying to make it illegal for people to act on their common sense.

if its still free and legal in university id take the legal option :)

But you can't keep what you download.

part of the appeal beyond just being free is the rebellious/outlaw/fuck the labels/fuck the RIAA flavor of p2p filesharing and that's a good thing.

That's always good too. :)

Maybe If the record companies would understand the needs of its buyers more music downloads would decrease. Who wants to buy a CD that has one song or two songs on it that are good and the rest stink for 15 or 20 bucks. The more sensible idea is to create a concept where the purchaser can go in to a store and tell them the songs he wants on a CD from any artist sort of like what P2P users do now.

At one time they had a system called personics where you could listen to music tracks, program what you wanted and in what order, and it would create a tape for you within minutes. I bought one of these. Unfortunately, personics no longer exists.

i think they had a similar system of doing 45rpm records. you select what songs onto a 45rpm disk & was done at the music store.

Recall a few years ago before all this P2P got popular getting mail from a company that would put songs for you from a list they sent out and put them on a cassete tape. Mostly oldies nothing new or current.