I can go to any pawn shop and buy CDs for under $5 but the artist does not see any of that money.
Well that's true. BUT....as you said... it's a
. Therefore one could surmise that at some point, it sold for new, which means that the artist
DID receive royals from the sale of that disc. Also, let's be honest here...the whole reason that this downloading issue is so hot is because so many people see that as a vehicle to AVOID buying it altogether. I know, that when put up against the pawn shop example, it does seem cockamamie, but just as Ford or Honda doesn't get (deserve, or demand) any royalties when you sell your used car, neither does the RIAA care when an already bought CD
gets sold again.
Then, they expect us to live with the cookie-cutter crap they put out from American Idol rejects
If it was "unknown" acts [meaning they have no chart position and therefore no sales] that constituted the bulk of pirated music, then there would be no reason for the RIAA to get involved.
So many people talk about how they "hate" Britney, Christina, Eminem, et. al. yet I'll wager my left nut that these very same "hated" Top 40 acts are the ones that get the most pilferage. I'd also wager that Brittney MP3's have been stolen more times than The Ocean Blue, The Outfield, Sarah Brightman, ELO, The Knack, Echo+The Bunnymen, Damn Yankees, and Counting Crows
Oh sure you may listen to the occasional Front 242 (my favorite of theirs BTW is
"Headhunter"), I'd also bet good money that those "unknown"/"sampler" groups you try and defend probably make up no more than 20% of your overall downloads. The rest of it is the same Top 40 stuff that you claim to "hate".
Think about it. If everyone who says they really hate The Backdoor Boys, REALLY hated them, then why would they be so popular? Since their primaary, if not exclusive appeal is the same demographic that spends the most time downloading and online, then how COULD they be popular? You catch my drift?
Remember in days of old no one considered recording from the radio illegal or taking profits from the artist
well actually, they
did. And it went all the way to The Supreme Court (before most of you were born). It was Disney Vs Sony.
Because of this, VCR's, tape recorders, and so on did very nearly become outlawed, but the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Sony in the landmark "Fair Use" act.
Probably the reason no one cared about off the air taping or even sharing tapes is 1) the quality....FM
broadcasts [at least 15 and 20 years ago] were totally flatlined and unmodulated in terms of fidelity. Plus there were commercials, segues, voice overs, etc. that made it very difficult to get an entire song. And as for taping, same thing. As anyone who knows anything about taping will tell you, each subsequent generation or 'dub' is slightly worse quality than the next. The reason the RIAA has shivers over MP3's and other digital formats is because those format inherant restrictions are no longer there; you can have a 100th generation copy of a copy and it will still sound as good as the original.