said by major marco :

Which is part & parcel of why the music industry is on the decline. The head cheesedicks at the RIAA absolutely refuse to see that reality and instead cling to the album concept because that's what's made them truckloads of money. It is a textbook 101 example of an industry refusing to accept consumer demand and now they're paying for it and desperately searching for someone (the consumers who else) to blame.

said by Nightfall :

2 wrongs don't make a right. The rampant copyright infringement going on is not the answer. A boycott of the product is.

said by SilverSurfer :

Which is a beautiful theory, but this is the market we're talking about, and, the market has ways of correcting itself. We are seing that consumers will choose convenience and risk alleged copyright infringment if necessary in order to satisfy demand. Boycotting never resolves anything. Companies laugh at boycotts. There is no leverage whatSOever over them to change their outdated business model.

said by Nightfall :

Customers choose convenience [...]

said by SilverSurfer :

I would agree with you on this count because it is about convenience, a demand the record companies have been ignoring since 1999. As to your allegations of two faced liars saying one thing and doing something completely different, I would also add freedom from DRM. The P2P clients are just filling consumer demands -convenience + DRM-free music- two items the RIAA has chosen and continues to ignore to its own financial peril.

said by Nightfall :

Imagine what would have happened if they would have embraced Shawn Fanning and Napster. What if they made Napster a pay service, charged everyone .25 cents a song (no DRM and various bitrates to choose from) for the entire RIAA catalog with no DRM. IMHO, music copyright infringement wouldn't be a big issue. Instead, they fought it tooth and nail.