Argh! Is this stealing? Piracy, Ethics, etc.

[Lavazza]

I am not attempting to justify stealing.

I'm sorry once again, as I'm not trying to single anyone out on this thread or witch hunt anyone- I'm just responding in a general sense. It's a bit touchy, I'm trying to tread lightly!

I am attempting to point out that, if copying music is stealing, then so is loaning a book, because the contents, both of which are intangibles, are being shared with another without permission.

I have to disagree with that. Loaning music is not the same as copying music, more below...

To show that the product is an intangible: If you copy the cd, you still have the original cd. The piece of plastic that stores the music is still intact, and in fact the music on the original cd is still there. But the music itself has been shared, like a candle flame lighting another candle. Therefore the music is an intangible.

Music, stories, spoken word, etc. are indeed intangible. But lets disband comparing it to a candle flame for the sole purpose of not comparing them in other ways. (fire not being an intellectual property, etc)

Likewise, if you loan a book to someone and the person reads it, the story has been transferred to another mind. That person returns your book, so nothing was stolen. However, the story or info contained in that book has been shared, like a candle flame lighting another candle. Is there another copy of the story? Not precisely, but there might as well be, because the emotions evoked by the story, or the usefulness of the knowledge contained in that book, now dwells in the mind of another person who did not buy that book.

How are they any different?

The difference is the keeping of the item that contains the content. The book comparison is a great one because it is very similar to a music CD. You loan a book to someone... they read it and give it back to you. You loan a music CD to someone, they listen to it and give it back to you. The key is- they give it back. It was loaned and returned. Not stealing.

With digital MP3 files, the container is not physical but electronic. The actual 1's and 0's that make up a digital MP3 file becomes the vehicle for the music. We can probably all agree that the MP3 file itself is not valuable unless you can play it with your favorite portable mp3 player or computer... Likewise a book is not valuable unless you can read it, or a music CD not valuable if you cannot play it (unless you need a cheap coaster!) So what I'm saying is- the MP3 has to be considered an 'item' in itself. Just because you can not hold it in your hands... does not mean it is not on the same playing field with books and cds.

So when you copy MP3 files, you are effectively making exact copies of the vehicle for the music therein. This is exactly the same as somehow making an exact copy of a book, or burning a music CD. When you copy and share or download copyrighted music in the format of MP3's it is indeed a theft.

Consider if we suddenly ran out of paper tomorrow, or plastic for making CDs, and we had no choice but to convert everything to digital files and it became the only vehicle for those types of content. Should we assume that at that point we never need to pay for any music, books, etc. ever again?

Is there another copy of the story? Not precisely, but there might as well be, because the emotions evoked by the story, or the usefulness of the knowledge contained in that book, now dwells in the mind of another person who did not buy that book.

The only case this is true is if that person had a 100% photographic memory. But since most people do not have this, people will tend to want to have a copy of music they like for themselves so they can listen to it more than once. Same thing with good books. (I'll be re-reading the Harry Potter books sometime this year I think!)

The only difference I see, really, is in quantity. We don't usually loan a book to hundreds or thousands of people. But when someone puts music up for download, there's no telling how many people will download it.

Exactly.

Is it any more or less stealing based on how many people access the intangible item?

I don't think so, personally.